High Court Kerala High Court

Jayachandran Nair vs R.Jayasree on 21 December, 2010

Kerala High Court
Jayachandran Nair vs R.Jayasree on 21 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Mat.Appeal.No. 5 of 2005()


1. JAYACHANDRAN NAIR S/O. VELUPILLAI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. R.JAYASREE, SASTHU BHAVAN,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.GIRI

                For Respondent  :SRI.J.HARIKUMAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :21/12/2010

 O R D E R
                         R.BASANT &
                K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
             -------------------------------------------
                MAT Appeal No.5 of 2005
             -------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 21st December, 2010

                          JUDGMENT

Basant, J.

This appeal is preferred by the appellant aggrieved

by the impugned order passed by the Family Court,

Thiruvananthapuram in O.P.No.838/1997. The appellant/

petitioner had claimed 2/3rd rights in the property standing

in the name of the respondent herein.

2. The parties have appeared before us. They, in the

presence of their counsel, have settled all their

outstanding disputes. The subject matter of this appeal is

also settled by an agreement between the parties. They,

accordingly agreed and we record the stipulations of the

agreement below.

i) The impugned order can be upheld.

ii) The respondent agrees that she shall, within a

period of three months from this date, execute a document

settling title in the plaint schedule property including the

building in the name of Sasthu Dev, the minor child born

Mat.A.No.5/2005 2

to them reserving a life estate in her favour.

3. Parties agree that this appeal can accordingly be

disposed of accepting the above terms.

4. A draft of this order was handed over to the

counsel and parties and they have approved these

stipulations.

5. In the result,

a) This appeal is allowed in part and the impugned

order is upheld.

b) The respondent is directed to execute a

document settling rights in the plaint schedule property in

the name of their son Sasthu Dev reserving a life estate in

her favour.

R.BASANT
JUDGE

K.SURENDRA MOHAN
JUDGE

css/