Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Jose vs K.G.Krishnakumar on 23 May, 2012

Author: N.K. Balakrishnan

Bench: N.K.Balakrishnan

       

  

  

 
 
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                                      PRESENT:

                      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

              THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014/26TH POUSHA, 1935

                                            RSA.No. 614 of 2013 (F)
                                                  -----------------------

      AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN AS 35/2011 of DISTRICT COURT, THODUPUZHA
                                                DATED 23-05-2012

      AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OS 320/2008 of MUNSIFF COURT, THODUPUZHA
                                                DATED 09-12-2010

APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS 7 AND 9:-:
--------------------------------------------------------

        1. JOSE, AGED 57 YEARS
            S/O.JOHN, MEMANA (H), KUNINJI KARA
            PURAPUZHA VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

        2. BABY, AGED 52 YEARS
            S/O.JOHN, MEMANA (H), KUNINJI KARA
            PURAPUZHA VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

            BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN
                          SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN
                          SRI.GEORGE MATHEW
                          SRI.P.A.ISMAIL
                          SRI.DIPU JAMES

RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF NO.1 AND DEFENDANTS:-:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

        1. K.G.KRISHNAKUMAR, AGED 50 YEARS
            S/O.GOPINATHAN NAIR, KRISHNAVILASAM (H)
            VAZHITHALA KARA, PURAPUZHA VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK
            IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 583.

        2. JOSEPH,, AGED 74 YEARS
            S/O.OUSEPH, MEMANA HOUSE, KUDAYATHOOR KARA
            KUDAYATHOOR VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK - 685 590.

        3. ALEYUKTTY JOHN,, AGED 78 YEARS                                (REMOVED)
            W/O.JOHN, MEMANA (PUTHENPURACKAL)KUNINJI P.O.
            PURAPPUZHA VILLAGE - 685 583.

        4. ANEY MEMANA SABS,, AGED 62 YEARS                              (REMOVED)
            ARADHANA BHAVAN, C/O.MOUNT CARMEL SCHOOL, BHUNGA P.O.
            HOSHIERPUR DISTRICT, PUNJAB - 144 210.

                                                                                      ..2

RSA.No. 614 of 2013 (F)


                                     -2-

    5. KUTTIYAMMA,, AGED 61 YEARS      (REMOVED)
       W/O.JOY, KALLOLICAKAL HOUSE, MANNACKANAD P.O.
       MARANGATTUPALLY, MEENACHIL TALUK
       KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 633.

    6. JESSY,, AGED 59 YEARS      (REMOVED)
       W/O.JOSEPH, KIZHAKKEMUKALEL HOUSE, KAKKOOR P.O
       KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 686 662.

    7. LEELAMMA,, AGED 55 YEARS        (REMOVED)
       W/O.SEBASTIAN, KUZHIKOMBIL (H), VIMALAGIRI P.O.
       THANKAMANI VILLAGE - 670 645.

    8. LISSY,, AGED 49 YEARS      (REMOVED)
       W/O.LATE JOSE, NEDUVELIL (H), KIZHAKOMBU P.O.
       ERNAKULAM - 683 562.

    9. MINI,, AGED 47 YEARS       (REMOVED)
       W/O.JACOB, MILLIL HOUSE, KIZHAKOMBU P.O.
       ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 562.


       RESPONDENTS 3 TO 9 ARE REMOVED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER
       ORDER IN I.A. NO.162/2014 DATED 16.1.2014


       R1 BY ADVS. SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
                     SMT.GEETHA P.MENON
                     SRI.N.AJITH
                     SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN
                     SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN


       THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
       16-01-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:




JJJ



                 N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.
           ------------------------------------------
                   R.S.A. No. 614 of 2013
           ------------------------------------------
         Dated this the 16th day of January, 2014


                      J U D G M E N T

Learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits that memo has been filed reporting payment of the amount as per the settlement agreement. The settlement agreement and memo are recorded.

Hence, this Regular Second Appeal is disposed of as settled. The settlement agreement will form part of the judgment.

Sd/-

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A. to Judge jjj