Kerala High Court
Moideenkutty [Died] vs Palliyali Abdul Kareem on 24 March, 2025
2025 : KER : 24774
RFA NO. 387 0F 2010
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERAILh AT ERNAKUIAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE lqR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
MONDAr, THE 24TH DAY oF mRen 2o25 / 3RI) cmlTmA, 1947
RNA NO. 387 0F 2010 (J)
AGAINST THE DECREE AND ruDGb4ENT DATED 16.ol.2olo
IN OS NO.200 0F 2006 0F Sue COURT, TIRUR
APPELIANT/PIAINIIFF:
M0IDEENRTTTY,
S/O.JDU, THRIKKAIINUR
PULATHOTTATHIL TIRtnENGnel TAI.uK,
TRENHIPAIIAM AMSOM DESOM,
REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
I . P . MOHA104ED USMAN,
S/O.ABU, -I)0- -DO-
ADD-L A2 SALEENA P.A
AGED 51 YEARS
D/O RATE MOIDEENKUTTY,
NIIIAD VILLA MATHAPPUZHA,
CHENAKKAI.ANGADI p. o. THENHlppALm4
MAIAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 636
aeDL A3 N14AS I.p
AGED 32 YENS
S/O RATE M0IDEENKUTTY,
NIIml) vll.IA mTHAppuzllA,
CHENAKKAIIANGADI P. O. THENHIPPAILAM
MAIAPPURAM DISTRICT - 673 636
ADDI. A4 NIIIAD I.P
AGED 19 YEARS
S/0 RATE MOIDEENKUTTY,
NIIIAD VILILh, MZITHAPPUZHA,
cHEiezLKKzil.ANGADI p. O. THENHlppAIAM
MAIAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 636
LEGAL HEIRS 0F THE DECEASED SOLE JDPEIIENT ARE
IreLEADED as ]DDITIONAL AppEI,I.ANTs 2 TO 4, vlDE
ORDER DATED 23.08.2024 IN I.A.NO.1 0F 2024 IN
REA 387/2010
2025 : KER : 24774
EurA No. 387 oF 2olo
BY JDVS .
SRI . JAMSHEEI) IIAFIZ
I . S . SREERTTTY
RESPONDENT /DEFENDANT :
PALLIYALI ABDUli KAREEM
s/O.ALAvlKUTTy MusAI,Iym, "imsADoOR" , ,
KZINNADITHARA HOUSE, P. O. PANTHARANGADI,
TIRIJRANGADI -676 306.
Br anvs.
SRI . v . C . MaDHAVANKUTT¥
SRI . K . P . StJDHEER
THIS REGUIIAR FIRST APPEAII HAVING COME UP FOR
aeMlssloN oN 24.o3.2o25, THE couRT oN TEE sAidB DAY
I)EI.IVERED THE FOLLOWING :
2®25 : KER : 24774
RNA NO. 387 0F 2010
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 24th day of March, 2025
This regular first appeal has been filed under Section
96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908, (hereinafter referred as `CPC' for short), challenging
judgment and decree dated 16.01.2010 in O.S.No.200/2006
on the files of the Sub Court, Tirur. The lst appellant herein
is the original plaintiff and additional appellants 2 to 4 are the
legal heirs of the deceased lst appellant. The respondent
herein is the defendant in the above suit.
2. In this matter, parties entered into
compromise and filed compromise petition as I.A.No.1/2025
under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC, incorporating the terms of
settlement.
3. On reading the compromise, the same is
legally acceptable. Hence, the same is accepted.
4. In view of the settlement, the verdicts under
2025 : KER : 24774
RFA NO. 387 0F 2010
challenge in this first a-ppeal stand set aside in substitution of
the compromise as per I.A.No.1/2025. Accordingly, this
appeal stands decreed in terms of I.A,No.1/2025. The
compromise petition, I.A.No.1/2025, shall form part of the
appellate decree.
Registry is directed to refund the admissible court
fee paid in this appeal to the additional appellants, as per
law.
All interlocutory orders stand vacated and all
interlocutory applications pending in this appeal stand
dismissed.
Registry is directed to forward a copy of this
judgment to the jurisdictional court forthwith.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN
JUDGE
nkr
BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
AT ERNAKULAM
I.ANo. I of 2025
In
RFA 387 of 2010
e'lants
1. Moideenkutty,(Died),
S/a. Abu, Thrikkannur Pulathottathii,
llrurangadi Taluk, Thenhipalam Amsom Desom,
Represented by his Power of Attorny Holder,
T.P. Usman, S/o. Abu,
Thrikkannur Pulathottathil,
Tirurangadi Taluk, Thenhipalam Amsom Desom,
Malappuram District.
2. Saleena P.A, Aged 51 years,
D/o. Late Moideenkutty,
Nihad Villa, Mathapuzha,
Chenakkalangadi P.O., Thaenhippalam,
Malappuram District-673636.
3. Nijas T.P, Aged 32 years,
S/o. Late Moideenkutty,
Nihad Villa, Mathapuzha,
Chenakkaiangadi P.O., Thaenhippaiani,
Malappuram District-673636.
4. Nihad T.P., Aged 19 years,
S/o. Late Moideenkutty,
Nihad Villa, Mathapuzha,
Chenakkalangadi P.O., Thaenhippalam,
Malappuram District-673636.
Vs.
Respondent/ Respondents:
Palliyali Abdul Kareem,
S/o. Alavikutty Musliyar,
"Masadeor'', Kannadithara House,
PO Pantharangadi, llrurangadi-676306.
coMPROMlsE pETITloN FILED ImD=R ORDER 23 RULE 3 oF T!IIE, CQP±
OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908.
1) The above appeal was filed dy the deceased lst appellant who was the plaintiff in
O.S.. 200/2006 before the Sub Court, llrur and the respondent is the defendant
therein. The suit was one for specific performance of an agreement to sell. The
trial court though found experts opinion and evidence of PW2 in favour of the
:=aa:|=]'[':nntti|#r¥:-&rfectegRE¢alR;#;#
4thappellant NIH^D+i.P rdfty--
appellant, without ascertaining the facts and circumstances of the case decreed
the suit partly allowing only return of advance amount paid. The court found that
the power of attorney holder of the plaintiff cannot validly depose on behalf of
plaintiff and so there is no proof for readiness and willingness of the part of the
plaintiff. The above decree is challenged in this appeal.
2) -The appellants and the respondents have amicably settled the matter. The
appellants do not have any grievances against the respondents. The appellants do
not intend to move further with the suit and appeal. Both the appellants and
respondents agree to withdraw all claims arising from this dispute and they agree
that there are no amount outstanding between them. The appellants herein will be
entitled to receive back the court fee paid and the amount deposited by the
defendants/respondents before the court below. No further document is necessary
for the plaintiffs to release the amount in their name deposited by the defendants
before the court below. Hence the appellants as per the compromise is
withdrawing the appeal as settled.
For the reasons stated above, it is most humbly prayed that this honorable court
may be pleased to record the terms of compromise entered into between the
appellants herein and the respondents herein and dispose this Regular First
Appeal.
DatedthistheizTaayofDecember,2024.
i;daaappppppee::I:aann:tt:N:;€o==-p:ia±fraR=#n;G&7oJ2gz_
Counsel F
.EEZE
Counsel For the Respondent
ppellant
--`-.-------------
if tyk k p gffi/LQof
