Narayani vs Girija on 5 September, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

SA.No. 442 of 2002()


1. NARAYANI, W/O. LATE SREEDHARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. LALITHA, D/O. LATE SREEDHARAN,
3. SUDHARSAN, S/O. LATE SREEDHARAN,
4. PUSHPAN, S/O. LATE SREEDHARAN,
5. LALU ALATHARA, S/O. LATE SREEDHARAN,
6. YAMUNA, D/O. LATE SREEDHARAN,
7. OMANAKUTTAN, S/O. LATE SREEDHARAN,
8. SURABHI, D/O. LATE SREEDHARAN,
9. AMBILY, D/O. LATE SREEDHARAN,

                        Vs



1. GIRIJA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY)

                For Respondent  :SRI.DEEPU THANKAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN

 Dated :05/09/2008

 O R D E R
                       K.P. BALACHANDRAN, J.
               -----------------------------------------------------
                           S.A. No 442 of 2002
               -----------------------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 5th September 2008


                                JUDGMENT

It is submitted that parties have settled the matter and that

compromise signed by the first appellant and the sole respondent

and also their counsel has been filed before this court agreeing for

the appeal being allowed setting aside the decree passed by the trial

court in favour of the respondent and further agreeing that the

appellants have no objection in the respondent getting back the

amount deposited by her before the court below towards balance

sale consideration, registration charges and other charges and also

agreeing that the appellants are entitled to get back the kudikidappu

purchase certificate with respect to the schedule property produced

before the Munsiff’s Court by the respondent and that application for

return of document will not be opposed by the respondent. The

compromise is to be recorded and the appeal is to be allowed as it is

to the benefit of the appellants though appellants 2 to 9 are not

SA 442/02 2

signatories to the settlement. Hence compromise is recorded and

this appeal is allowed and the decree passed by the trial court

decreeing the suit in favour of the respondent is hereby set aside.

Sd/-

K.P. BALACHANDRAN
Judge

05/09/2008
en

Order on CMP Nos 1388 & 2021 of 2002

——————————————————

Dismissed.

                                           Id./- K.P.Balachandran,Judge
06/09/2008
            [true copy]

SA 442/02    3




                K.P. BALACHANDRAN, J.


                      S.A. No 442 of 2002

                            JUDGMENT

                              06/09/2008