Kerala High Court
Babu Abraham vs Saji Abraham on 20 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021/30TH POUSHA, 1942
RSA.No.97 OF 2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE IN AS 12/2016
DATED 18-06-2016 OF DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA
OS 241/2012 DATED 23-12-2015 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNY
APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS:
1 BABU ABRAHAM,
AGED 48,
S/O.ABRAHAM,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
NJOOZHOOR MURI, AYROOR VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PIN CODE-689 672.
2 RACHEL ROY,
AGED 42,
W/O.ROY,
ODOLOIL HOUSE,
KURIYANNUR MURI,
KOLABHAGOM.P.O.,
THOTTAPPUZHASSERRY VILLAGE,
THIRUVALLA TALUK, PIN CODE-689 672.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)
SRI.SUNIL N.SHENOI
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2/DEFENDANTS 1 & 2:
1 SAJI ABRAHAM,
AGED 40,
S/O.ABRAHAM,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
NJOOZHOOR MURI, AYROOR VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,
PIN CODE-689 672.
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..2..
2 ANSU,
AGED 30,
W/O.SAJI ABRAHAM,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
NJOOZHOOR MURI, AYROOR VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,
PIN CODE-689 672.
3 ABRAHAM,
AGED 86,
S/O.V.M.ABRAHAM,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
NJOOZHOOR MURI, AYROOR VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,
PIN CODE-689 672.
4 SUJA VARGHESE,
AGED 46,
W/O.VARGHESE,
CHAKALAVADAKEYIL HOUSE,
THOMBIKANDAM.P.O, EDAMURY, RANNY,
PIN CODE -689 673.
R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.JACOB.P.ALEX
R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH.P.ALEX
R4 BY ADV.SRI.MANU SANKAR.P.
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 19-01-2021, ALONG WITH RSA.108/2017, RSA.342/2017, THE
COURT ON 20-01-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..3..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021/30TH POUSHA, 1942
RSA.No.108 OF 2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE IN AS 10/2016
DATED 18-06-2016 OF DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA
OS 243/2012 DATED 23-12-2015 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNY
APPELLANT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:
BABU ABRAHAM,
AGED 48,
S/O.ABRAHAM,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
NJOOZHOOR MURI,
AYIROOR VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PIN CODE- 689 672.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)
SRI.SUNIL N.SHENOI
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:
SAJI ABRAHAM,
AGED 37,
S/O.ABRAHAM,
VARIKKANIKUZHIYIL HOUSE,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL) HOUSE, NJOOZHOOR MURI,
AYIROOR VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 689 672.
BY ADV. SRI.JACOB P.ALEX
BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 19-01-2021, ALONG WITH RSA.97/2017, RSA.342/2017, THE
COURT ON 20-01-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..4..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021/30TH POUSHA, 1942
RSA.No.342 OF 2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE IN AS 11/2016
DATED 18-06-2016 OF DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA
OS 205/2012 DATED 23-12-2015 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNY
APPELLANT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:
ABRAHAM,
AGED 86 YEARS,
S/O.LATE ABRAHAM,
VARIKKANIKUZHIYIL HOUSE, NJOOZHOOR MURI,
AYROOR VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK,
PIN CODE - 689 672, NOW RESIDING AT
ODOLOLIL HOUSE, KURIYANNUR MURI,
KOLABHAGOM.P.O., THOTTAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE,
THIRUVALLA TALUK, PIN CODE - 689 672.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)
SRI.SHIBU JOSEPH
SRI.SUNIL N.SHENOI
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:
SAJI ABRAHAM,
AGED 37, S/O.ABRAHAM,
VARIKKANIKUZHIYIL HOUSE, (ALUNKAL
CHUZHUKUNNEL) HOUSE, NJOOZHOOR MURI,
AYROOR VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 689 672.
BY ADV. SRI.JACOB P.ALEX
BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 19-01-2021, ALONG WITH RSA.97/2017, RSA.108/2017, THE
COURT ON 20-01-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..5..
JUDGMENT
R.S.A.No.97/2017 arises from the judgment and decree dated 18.6.2016 passed in A.S.No.12/2016 on the file of the District Court, Pathanamthitta which arises from the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2015 passed in O.S.No.241/2012 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Ranny.
2. Appellants and respondents 1 and 4 are the children of the 3rd respondent in the above appeal. The 2 nd respondent is the wife of the 1 st respondent. The appellants are plaintiffs in O.S.No.241/2012 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Ranny. The parties are hereinafter referred to as the appellants and respondents according to their status in R.S.A.No.97/2017 unless otherwise stated.
3. O.S.No.241/2012 was tried jointly with O.S.No.205/2012 and O.S.No.243/2012 respectively. By judgment dated 23.12.2015, the learned Munsiff declared the title of the 1st respondent over the plaint schedule I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017, R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017 ..6..
property having an extent of 76.77 ares comprised in Sy.No.226/4 of Ayroor Village based on Ext.A1 settlement deed No.157/2009 of Aranmula Sub Registry. The learned Munsiff further declared that Ext.A3 cancellation deed No.1640/2011 and Ext.A4 sale deed No.306/2012 of Aranmula Sub Registry as null and void.
4. Challenging the aforesaid judgments and decrees in O.S.No.241/2012, O.S.No.205/2012 and O.S.No.243/2012, the appellants and 3rd respondent filed A.S.No.10/2016, A.S.No.11/2016 and A.S.No.12/2016 respectively before the District Court, Pathanamthitta. As per the common judgment and decree dated 18.6.2016 the learned District Judge dismissed the appeals confirming the judgments and decrees passed by the trial court. Resultantly, the plaintiffs and defendants filed R.S.A.No.97/2017, R.S.No.108/2017 and R.S.A.No.342/2017 challenging the judgments and decrees in I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017, R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017 ..7..
A.S.Nos.10/2016, 11/2016 and 12/2016 respectively of the District Court, Pathanamthitta.
5. When the second appeals have come up for hearing, the learned counsel for the appellants and respondents submit that they filed I.A.No.1/2020 under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure to pass a decree in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents.
7. It is stated in the compromise petition that the 1st respondent along with his mother, late Aleyamma filed W.P.(C)No.27874/2012 before this Court, challenging the order passed by the RDO and Maintenance Tribunal, Thiruvalla, cancelling transfer of registry of decree schedule property mutated in the name of the 1 st respondent, on the request of the 3 rd respondent. It is I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017, R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017 ..8..
further stated that the appellants and the respondents have settled their disputes in the above appeal and connected appeals along with W.P.(C)No.27874/2012 in accordance with the terms of the compromise. On a perusal of the terms of the compromise, this Court is satisfied that the terms are in accordance with law. Hence the compromise is recorded. The terms of the compromise shall form part of the decree.
In the result, I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017 stands allowed. The terms of the compromise will form part of the decree. Thus, R.S.A.No.97/2017, R.S.A.No.108/2017 and R.S.A.No.342/2017 are disposed of in terms of the compromise which will form part of the decree. There will be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
N.ANIL KUMAR,
JUDGE
skj
N
' R/g'
/\\
/"
Presented on: 21 -12-2020
BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAN'I l.A.No. I\t of 2020 in R.S.A. No. 97 of 2017 Babu Abraham and another Appellants Vs. SajiAbraham and others Respondents COMPROMISE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER XX|IT RULE 3 OF THE .o\/ U6f.';
t{'s" -A
1x' epry-W
W Nr )-^
(, COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS:
4ffi
suNfl N. SHENOT (5-2709) W80t2012 GOUNSEL FOR REPSONDENTS 1.2 AND 4:
-._-*lrAcoB P. ALEX (J-821) K/355/2000 I i:rt"d P. ALEX (J-975) Kj1-Ct2002 j 1 \)t[?t?t \r,no*u sANKAR p.Kts2st2ols BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM I l.A.No. of 2020 R.S.A. No. I IN 97 of 2017 w PETTION E RS/APPE LLANTS :
1. Babu Abraham, aged 52, S/o.Abraham, Alunkal Chuzhukunnel House, Njoozhoor Muri, Ayroor Village, Ranny Taluk, PIN 689 612.
2. Rachel Roy, aged 46, Wo.Roy, Odoloil House, Kuriyannur Muri, Kolabhagom P.O, Thottappuzhassery Village, Thiruvalla Taluk, PIN 689 545.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1. Saji Abraham, aged 44, S/o. Abraham, Alumkal Chuzhukunnel House, Njoozhoor Muri, Ayroor Village, Ayroor North PO, Ranny Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. PIN 689 612
2. Ansu, aged 38, Wo. Saji Abraham, Alumkal Chuzhukunnel House, Njoozhoor Muri, Ayroor Village, Ayroor North PO, Ranny Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. PIN 689 612.
3. Abraham, aged 90, S/o. V.M. Abraham, Alunkal Chuzhukunnel House, Njoozhoor Muri, Ayroor Village, Ranny Taluk, Pathanamthitta District, PIN 689 612.
4. Suja Varghese, aged 50, Wo. Varghese, Chakalavadakeyil House, Thombikandom P.O., Edamury, Ranny, PIN 689 676.
APPELLANT: 1"'RESPoNDENT V.2ND 1ST _. RESPONDENT (Babu Abraham) (SajiAbraham) (Ansu) Hnitu-l U*Ioss e-{ 2ND APPELLANT 3RD RESPONDENT v/4TH RESPoNDENT (Rachel Roy) (Abraham) (Suja Varghese) PuJRt. ,9i
-----v alleslalion h onlywith regadh the of lhe signalory and Embassy ol India n0 rcsp0l|sibilily tor lhe conlonls, D Sgu:t).a,&r..*;* %^^tt-) tr-uDquoaant. t,2 a,al 4 2, COMPROMISE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 3 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE.19O8
1. The above Regular Second Appeal arises from the judgment and decree dated 18-06-2016 passed in A.S.No.12of 2016, on the files of District Court, Pathanamthitta, which arises from the judgment and decree dated 23-12-2015, passed in O.S.No.241 of 2012, on the files of Munsiffs Court, Ranni.
2. Appellants and respondents 1 and 4 are the children of 3ro respondent in the above appeal. The 2nd respondent is the wife of 1st respondent. Appellants are the plaintiffs in O.S.No .241 of 2012, on the files of Munsiffs Court, Ranni.
3. O.S.No.241 of 2012, on the files of Munsiffs Court, Ranni was tried jointly with O.S.N o.205 of 2012 and O.S.No.243 of 2012, respectively. The said suits were disposed by of the Munsiffs Court, Ranni as per the common judgment dated 23-12-2015.
4. As per the said judgment dated 23-12-2015 the title of 1st respondent herein over the plaint schedule property having an extent of ,....2ND APPELLANT: RESPONDENT RESPONDENT W 1ST 1ST (Babu Abraham) (SajiAbraham) (Ansu) Fni s ct P Uaflass-v1 2ND APPELLANT 3RD RESPONDENT \./.4TH RESPONDENT (Rachel Roy) (Abraham) (Suja Varghese) f*4/ & Ilrh attestation h onryffiio rrre identily 0f tlte signalory and Embassy oltndia bears no responsibililffor lha conlenls, T t^-- {Y J+e-o- P,+U\, f|Awa,jf z JT-
B2-l'- t</e'q/2ooo ve"aa4L-^t R,t, Qz% R+ 6
-
76.77 Ares comprised in su rvey No.22614 of Ayroor Village based on Exhibit ,A1, Settlement deed No.157 of 2009 of Aranmula Sub Registry was declared and Exhibit43, Cancelation deed No.1640 of 2011 and Exhibit44, Sale deed No.306 of 2012 of Aranmula Sub Registrywere declared as null and void.
5. Appellants and the 3'd respondent filed A.S.No.10 of 2016, A.S No.11 of 2016 and A.S.No.12 of 2016 before the District Court, Pathanamthitta challenging the above mentioned common judgment and decrees passed in O.S.No.241 of 2012, O.S.No.205 of 2012 and O.S.No.243 of 2012 of the Munsiff s court, Ranni. As per common judgment and decree dated 18-06-2016, the District Court, Pathanamthitta, dismissed the appeals, confirming and decree passed by the trial court.
6. Appellants and the 3rd respondent have filed R.S.A.No.97 of 2017, R.S.A.No.108 of 2017 and R.S.A.No.342 of 2017, challenging the judgment and decrees passed by the District Court, Pathanamthitta in A.S.Nos.10 of 2016. A.S No.1 1 of 2016 and A.S.No.1 2 of 2016.
.-/'1sr RESPONDENT /2ND
1STAPPELLANT: RESPoNDENT
(Babu Abraham) (Saji Abraham) (Ansu)
,zll+JtV' Hd'su P U offqro-J
,tSZ1
I
2ND APPELLANT 3RDTESPONDENT ,-/.41H RESPoNDENT
(Rachel Roy)
'
(Abraham) ...,:i.i.
'-'4g
(Suja
-Varghese)
$loi'!tr,''
,*, resadrorre
ruellilly 0t tfle $ignalory and Embassy 0ll]|dia Dears tto responsibility lor the c0fltettls, !,*--g., J- s2r_ u
-8-n h;
/ 355/oo
-
(Gur\Ael Qosp,'->-t-enl l r2., 4 +
7. lt is also submitted that the lstrespondent along with his mother, late Aleyamma, filed W.P.(C).No .27874 of 2Q12 before this Hon'ble Court, essentially challenging the order passed by the RDO and Maintenance Tribunal, Thiruvalla, cancelling transfer of registry of decree schedule property mutated in the name of lstrespondent, on the request of 3'o respondent. The said writ petition is still pending consideration before this Hon'ble Court.
It is submitted that the appellants and the respondents have now settled their disputes in the above appeal and connected appeals along with W.P.(c).No.27874 of 2012, on the following terms'.
a. Appellants and respondents accept and acknowledge the title and right of 1st respondent over the decree schedule property having an extent of 76.77 Ares of land comprised in survey No.22614 of AyroorVillage, based on Exhibit 41 Settlement deed No.157 of 2009 of Aranmula Sub Registry.
1ST APPELLANT: v 1sr RESPONDENT /.zND RESPONDENT
(Babu Abraham) (Ansu)
0n isrl P Uo++qsft{
2ND APPELLANT 3RD RESPONDENT u,4TH RESPoNDENT
(Rachel Roy) (Abraham) (Suja Varghese)
4i13
this alhstafion is only with'ffgdtd to the India idenlity ol the signatory andtmbassy ol bean no rssponsibility lot lho conlents.
I /\--
Jftr--A. p, AkE) to/oc,ma
J^ Gll , v /zss />o
-
C-o' ,tDel +r,^/ Q.Sp*Aoll l, e, 4
5
b. All parties accept and affirm the judgment and decree passed
by the Munsiffs Court, Ranni in O.S.No.205 of 2012 and O.S.No.243 of 2012, declaring Exhibit ,A3 Cancelation deed No.1640 of 2011 and Exhibit 44 Sale deed No.306 of 212 of Aranmula Sub Registry as null and Void.
c. Parties are hereby withdrawing all allegations raised against each other in above said proceedings. The 3'd respondent has no grievance against the 1st respondent and he does not wish to pursue any legal proceedings against him.
d. The 1tt respondent has agreed to convey and transfer one- half portion in the decree schedule property having an extent of 76.77 Ares comprised in survey No.22614 of Ayroor Village based on Exhibit 41, Settlement deed No.157112009 of Aranmula Sub Registry in favour of the lstappellant by executing and registering a deed of conveyance, within a period of 12 months from the date of the decree, at the cost of the 1't appellant.
e. The appellants and 3'o respondent have no objection in allowing W.P.C No.27874 of 2012 pending before this Hon'ble Court. 1ST APPELLANT: _. ISt RESPONDENT .. 2ND RESPONDENT (Babu Abraham) (s^aj iAbraham) (Ansu) I All r'ntw..,.
2ND n D\ vt,-/-
APPELLANT
| s finisd
../4TH RESPONDENT
!"1+os+5
(Rachel Roy) (Abraham) (Suja Varghese)
,)s+io(
6W
ss il;ili tid;htahiY and Embasy ollndia
\eW nriit i'o tesponiibiliu lfflhe c0tttents'
J+z-o,?. *fsV |tvoc,nt
z- 5- 6-t, t</;,;s,/6"
6
f. All parties pray that R.S.A No. 97 of 2017, R.S.A No.108 of 2017 and R.S.A No.342 of 2017 before this Hon'ble Court may be disposed of by passing decree in terms of this compromise.
Dated this the day of November,2020. h 1ST APPELLANT:
(Babu Abraham) ,Ff'fffi1ap ll 6^ )\'* $ I 2ND APPELLANT Slgned ln mY Presence (Slgnature Atteeted) (Rachel Roy) Pce t/ Ko CONSTJI"AR OtrIICER EMBASSY OF INDIA COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS: KTIWAIT p4i05 's ,*ffi 1STRESPONDENT (SajiAbraham) A "*1,*l,1lffil'illl;* of India EmbacsY Kuwelt ' (Ansu) t, P";tq-P- Uo$osset \t zr-- t'-
^ ALF^xt-
couNSEL FoR THE RESeoNDENTS tazag Ihis alleslalion is only wilh rcgad lo lhe l/ .-& l'-{; -loo q./l* idenlity olthe signaloryand Embassy ollndia i{?"7.*,
-r\d--. >6b'-3\,^' beam no nsponsibiliU lor lhe c0nlents, sfi,t!.' \*-' L<'^aarry i--qY:,Q^or 3RD RESpONDENI i^o,.][;Ii''"-L, c6+Dsel &d Jn^'- +({}-tYz/u W\V.& 4TH RESPoNDEN
-
afotfl L. J' cflno4o't - / ^ (Suja Varghese) K<"/M / 4dr