Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.47 seconds)
Documents citing Teena M.Ansari vs Rinoj Eappen on 9 December, 2019

P.A.Muhammed Saleem vs Sumayya.K.S on 27 January, 2020

13. It is well settled as held in the decision of this Court in Teena M.Ansari v. Rinu Eappen [2019 (4) KHC 593] that, the mediation agreement, having been signed and acted upon, is binding on the parties. After entering into a settlement through the process of mediation and after the court as well as the parties have acted upon the OP (FC).No.741 OF 2019 10 settlement, one of the parties cannot be permitted to unilaterally withdraw from the same.
Kerala High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Thankamma vs Ponnamma on 27 July, 2021

has got a certain solemnity attached to the mediation process, as held in Teena's case (supra). Hence, the allegation of fraud as against the mediation process is clearly unsustainable and an appeal challenging the compromise decree passed by a competent court of jurisdiction by way of mediation process in accordance with rules, is not maintainable under Section 96(3) of the Code. Assuming for arguments sake, even if the delay was condoned by the first appellate court, still an appeal challenging a compromise decree duly obtained by way of mediation process was unsustainable before the first appellate court in view of Section 96(3) of the Code.
Kerala High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Suruchi Bhasin @ Suruchi Bajaj & Anr. vs Rajiv Bajaj & Anr. on 24 April, 2024

10. Similar situation came up for consideration in the case of Teena M. Ansari vs. Rinoj Eappen. 2019 SCC OnLIne Ker 2828, wherein the parties in a matrimonial dispute had arrived at a settlement and a Memorandum of Settlement was duly executed by them during the process of mediation. However, the petitioner subsequently wanted to withdraw the Agreement of Settlement. It was held by Kerala High Court that after entering into a Settlement through the process of mediation and after the Court as well as the parties have acted upon the Settlement, one of the parties cannot be permitted to unilaterally withdraw for the same. Granting permission for withdrawing from the Settlement Agreement which was voluntarily signed by the parties, would destroy the sanctity of the whole process of mediation. The Settlement Agreement entered into between the parties through mediation conducted by the High Court Mediation Centre and after getting the imprimatur of the Court has got a certain solemnity attached to it.
Delhi High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - N B Krishna - Full Document

P.V.Padhmanabhan vs Sunitha.K on 10 July, 2025

18. That being so concluded, we notice from the impugned order that the learned Family Court has dealt with the requirement of ensuring sanctity to agreements between parties - especially when it leads to decrees - as long as they remain without any vitiating factors, in its correct perspective. The Court has relied upon Teena M.Ansari v. Rinoj Eappen [2019 (4) KHC 593] and Mohan P.K. and others v. Sudakshina Ramakrishnan and others [2017 (3) KLT 254] in support; and we find that the ratio therein has been correctly applied. This is because, as said in the first paragraph, if we are to allow parties
Kerala High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - D Ramachandran - Full Document

P.V.Padhmanabhan vs Sunitha.K on 10 July, 2025

18. That being so concluded, we notice from the impugned order that the learned Family Court has dealt with the requirement of ensuring sanctity to agreements between parties - especially when it leads to decrees - as long as they remain without any vitiating factors, in its correct perspective. The Court has relied upon Teena M.Ansari v. Rinoj Eappen [2019 (4) KHC 593] and Mohan P.K. and others v. Sudakshina Ramakrishnan and others [2017 (3) KLT 254] in support; and we find that the ratio therein has been correctly applied. This is because, as said in the first paragraph, if we are to allow parties
Kerala High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - D Ramachandran - Full Document
1