Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA, RSA NO. 694 OF 2010 AS 48/2003 OF DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA OS 576/1994 OF MUNSIFF COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT/1ST DEFENDANT: CHACKO ALIAS BABU, S/O REV.C.CHACKO, POWER TONE, T.C. 16/494, KOCHAR ROAD,, EDAPPAZHANJI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 14. BY ADV SRI.K.B.PRADEEP RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS 2-4 & RESPONDENTS 3-5/ADDL. PLAINTIFFS 2-4 & DEFENDANTS 3-5: *1 MERCY BENJAMIN,W/O LATE REV.BENJAMIN (DELETED)
MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI AND, VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK-689114 2 ANISH BENJAMIN, S/O.LATE REV.BENJAMIN MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI AND, VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK-689114 *3 PRIYA BENJAMIN,D/O.LATE REV.BENJAMIN (DELETED) MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI AND, VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK-689114 *4 MARIAMMA MATHEW,W/O REV.DR.K.P.MATHEW (DELETED) KARIMPARA MANNIL, MANJADI P.O., THIRUVALLA- *5 ELIZABETH PUNNOOSE, (DELETED) W/O.REV.PUNNOOSE CHERIYAN, MANGALATH HOUSE, CHELAKOMPU, KARUKACHAL-689121 ..2.. *6 DR.P.SAMUEL, S/O.LATE REV.C.CHACKO (DELETED) PALLATHU HOUSE, VENMANI P.O., CHENGANNOOR-689121 * R1 & R3-R6 ARE DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY, ALLOWING IA NO.1/2021, AS PER JUDGMENT DATED 30.11.2021. BY ADVS. SRI.T.A.RAJAN SMT.E.SHEENA
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.11.2021, ALONG WITH RSA.695/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..3..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021/9TH AGRAHAYANA, RSA NO. 695 OF 2010 AS 49/2003 OF DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA OS 711/1994 OF MUNSIFF COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA
APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF: CHACKO ALIAS BABU, S/O.REV.C.CHACKO POWER TONE, T.C.16/494, KOCHAR ROAD,, EDAPPAZHANJI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -14. BY ADV SRI.K.B.PRADEEP RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS 2 & 4-10 & LRs OF 3RD DEFENDANT/ DEFENDANTS 2, 4-7 & 10-12: *1 ROSAMMA CHACKO, (REMOVED) W/O.LATE P.I.CHACKO, PALLATHU HOUSE, VENMONY P.O., CHENGANNOOR. *(THE FIRST RESPONDENT IS REMOVED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT AS PER
ORDER DATED 18.12.2019 IN IA.1/2019.)
2 MARIAMMA MATHEW, W/O.P.M.MATHEW VARATHARA PALLATHU PUTHENTHARAYIL, NIRANAM P.O., KADAPRA, THIRUVALLA. 3 MERCY BENJAMIN, W/O.LATE REV.BENJAMIN MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI AND VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK. ..4.. 4 VARUGHESE BENJAMIN ALSO KNOWN AS ANISH BENJAMIN, S/O.LATE REV.BENJAMIN,, MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI,, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK. 5 PRIYA BENJAMIN DO.LATE REV.BENJAMIN MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI AND VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK. 6 LATHA MARY VARUGHESE, D/O.LATE M.V.VARGHESE, MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI AND VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK. 7 JIJI VARGHESE, D/O.LATE M.V.VARUGHESE MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI,, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK. 8 SUDHA ELIZABETH VARGHESE, D/O.LATE M.V.VARUGHESE, MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI, KOZHENCHERY TALUK. 9 PONNUMOL, W/O.M.V.SAMUEL, MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI, KOZHENCHERY TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT VIJAYA BHAVAN, HIMAI NAGAR-6, JAMNAGAR, GUJARAT. 10 VARGHESE KNOWN AS VIJI, S/O.M.V.SAMUEL, MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI, KOZHENCHERY TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT VIJAYA BHAVAN, HIMAI NAGAR-6, JAMNAGAR, GUJARAT. 11 SHERLY, D/O.LATE M.V.SAMUEL, MOOTHAMPACKAL HOUSE, EDAYARANMULA MURI, KOZHENCHERY TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT VIJAYA BHAVAN, HIMAI NAGAR-6, JAMNAGAR, GUJARAT. BY ADV SRI.T.A.RAJAN R3-R5 THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 30.11.2021, ALONG WITH RSA.694/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..5..
JUDGMENT
The above second appeals arise from the common
judgment and decree of the District Court,
Pathanamthitta in AS Nos.48 & 49 of 2003.
2. RSA No.694/2010 is directed against the
judgment and decree dated 30.11.2009 in AS
No.48/2003 on the file of the District Court, Pathanamthitta arising from the judgment and decree dated 29.11.2002 in OS No. 576/1994 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Pathanamthitta. RSA No.695/2010 is against the judgment and decree dated 30.11.2009 in AS No.49/2003 on the file of the District Court, Pathanamthitta arising from the judgment and decree dated 29.11.2002 in OS No.711/1994 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Pathanamthitta.
3. OS No.576/1994 and OS No.711/1994 were tried together and the trial court passed a common ..6..
judgment and decree. The appellant in RSA
No.694/2010 is the 1st respondent before the first appellate court and the first defendant in the trial court. The respondents herein are appellants 2 to 4 and respondents 3 to 5 before the first appellate court and additional plaintiffs 2 to 4 and defendants 3 to 5 in the trial court.
4. The appellant in RSA No.695/2010 is the 1 st
respondent before the first appellate court and the plaintiff in the trial court. The respondents are appellants 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 and legal heirs of the 3 rd defendant before the first appellate court and defendants 2, 4 to 7 and 10 to 12 before the trial court.
5. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant and the 2nd respondent in RSA No.
..7.. finally resolved the dispute by virtue of mediation agreement dated 07.10.2021. On receipt of the mediation agreement before this Court, the learned counsel for the appellants in RSA No.694/2010 filed I.A.No.1/2021 seeking to delete respondent Nos.1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 from the party array. The learned counsel for the contesting 2nd respondent submits that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and all the other respondents are not necessary parties to the mediation agreement.
6. This Court has gone through the terms of the
compromise. On going through the compromise, it appears that the compromise is recorded jointly in RSA Nos. 694/2010 & 695/2010. Since all the respondents except the 2nd respondent are removed from the party array, the compromise in RSA No. 694/2010 is legally in order. However, the respondents ..8.. in RSA No. 695/2010 are not parties to the compromise. Hence, the compromise in RSA No.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant submits
that nothing survives for consideration in RSA No. 695/2010 in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties in RSA No. 694/2010. Therefore, the learned counsel seeks to withdraw RSA No. 695/2010.
8. In the light of the above, I.A.No.1/2021 in RSA No.694/2010 stands allowed and respondent Nos.1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 in RSA No. 694/2010 are deleted from the party array.
9. In the result, RSA No. 694/2010 is disposed of
in terms of the agreement. The mediation agreement between the appellant and the 2nd respondent in RSA No. 694/2010 is recorded. The terms of compromise will form part of the decree. ..9.. 10.RSA No. 695/2010 is dismissed as withdrawn in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties in RSA No. 694/2010. There would be no order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, stand closed. Sd/- N.ANIL KUMAR JUDGE Bka/01.12.2021