C.S.Vijayalakshmi vs Rajalakshmi on 13 July, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

SA.No. 926 of 1998(B)



1. C.S.VIJAYALAKSHMI
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. RAJALAKSHMI
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.RADHAKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)

The Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID

 Dated :13/07/2009

 O R D E R
                           HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.
                       ----------------------------------------
                             S.A.No. 926 of 1998
                       ----------------------------------------
                   Dated this the 13th day of July, 2009

                                  JUDGMENT

The Second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in

A.S. No. 325/1993 on the file of the District Court, Thrissur which arises

from the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 273/1991 on the file of the

Munsiff’s Court, Wadakkanchery. The suit was filed for perpetual

prohibitory injunction. The trial court granted a decree for permanent

prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into the

plaint schedule property or starting residence in their house or from

committing any act or waste or causing hindrance to the plaintiffs’

possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule items. In the appeal filed

by the defendants as A.S. No. 325/1993, the lower appellate court set

aside the trial court’s judgment and decree and allowed the said appeal

Hence the Second Appeal. The parties hereinafter referred to as plaintiffs

and defendants.

2. When the matter was taken up for final hearing, it is reported

by the counsel that the parties have entered into an agreement and

settled all the disputes between them. It is also reported that the parties

filed I.A No. 1333/2009 praying to pass a decree in terms of the

compromise as stipulated in the said I.A. and to dispose of the Second

Appeal

S.A. No. 926 of 1998 -2-

3. On a reading of the above said I.A. I find that the plaintiffs and

defendants have settled the subject matter of the suit and the appeal out

of court and all the terms of compromise are recited . The terms of

compromise are hereby recorded and shall form part of the decree and

judgment. Accordingly a decree as prayed for is passed in terms of

compromise as stipulated in the said I.A and the Second Appeal is

disposed of. The plaintiffs/appellants are entitled to refund of = of the

Court fee paid.

(HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE)

es.

HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.

—————————

S.A.No. 926 of 1998

—————————-

JUDGMENT

13th July, 2009