Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Abraham vs Chandran

Abraham vs Chandran

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Feb 28, 2023
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1357707

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
RSA/631/2006

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Abraham

Respondent

Chandran

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mrs. justice m.r.anitha tuesday, the 28th day of february 2023 / 9th phalguna, 1944 rsa no. 631 of 2006 against the order/judgment in as 235/2005 of district court, ernakulam os 12/1998 of munsiff court, kolenchery appellants/appellants/plaintiffs:1 abraham, aged 71 years, s/o.varkey, parambathu house, marangattully kara, thiruvaniyoor 2 selin, aged 45 years, w/o.abraham nanmalil house, morakkala kara, kunnathunadu taluk. 3 jeeva, aged 39 years w/o.geroge thomas, murithottathil house, mekkadampu kara, valakom village, muvattupuzha taluk. 4 salu, aged 42 years, s/o.abraham parambathu house, marangattully kara, thiruvaniyoor village, by advs. sri.p.n.ramakrishnan nair sri.aju mathew sri.p.viswanathanrespondents/respondents/defendants: 1 chandran, aged about 54 years, s/o.gopalan, avungattil house, marangattully kara, thiruvaniyoor 2 saradha, aged 71 years, w/o.gopalan avungattil house, marangattully kara, thiruvaniyoor village, this regular second appeal having come up for admission on 28.02.2023, the court on the same day delivered the following: r.s.a.no.631/2006judgmentthis appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree in a.s.no.235/2005 on the files of district court, ernakulam, which arose out of the judgment and decree in o.s.no.12/1998 on the file of munsiff's court, kolencherry.2. on 27.02.2023 learned counsel for the appellantsreported that the appeal is not pressed. this court has directed to file memo to that effect. memo not filed. when the case is taken up, no representation for the appellants also. hence, appeal dismissed for default. sd/- m.r.anitha shg judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1944 RSA NO. 631 OF 2006 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN AS 235/2005 OF DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM OS 12/1998 OF MUNSIFF COURT, KOLENCHERY APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS:

1 ABRAHAM, AGED 71 YEARS, S/O.VARKEY, PARAMBATHU HOUSE, MARANGATTULLY KARA, THIRUVANIYOOR 2 SELIN, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O.ABRAHAM NANMALIL HOUSE, MORAKKALA KARA, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. 3 JEEVA, AGED 39 YEARS W/O.GEROGE THOMAS, MURITHOTTATHIL HOUSE, MEKKADAMPU KARA, VALAKOM VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. 4 SALU, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.ABRAHAM PARAMBATHU HOUSE, MARANGATTULLY KARA, THIRUVANIYOOR VILLAGE, BY ADVS. SRI.P.N.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR SRI.AJU MATHEW SRI.P.VISWANATHAN

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: 1 CHANDRAN, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAN, AVUNGATTIL HOUSE, MARANGATTULLY KARA, THIRUVANIYOOR 2 SARADHA, AGED 71 YEARS, W/O.GOPALAN AVUNGATTIL HOUSE, MARANGATTULLY KARA, THIRUVANIYOOR VILLAGE, THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.S.A.NO.631/2006

JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.235/2005 on the files of District Court, Ernakulam, which arose out of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.12/1998 on the file of Munsiff's Court, Kolencherry.

2. On 27.02.2023 learned counsel for the appellants

reported that the appeal is not pressed. This Court has directed to file memo to that effect. Memo not filed. When the case is taken up, no representation for the appellants also. Hence, appeal dismissed for default. Sd/- M.R.ANITHA SHG JUDGE

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial