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.

Subhadra vs Rajamma

Subhadra vs Rajamma

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Aug 05, 2021
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1661375

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/906/2014

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Subhadra

Respondent

Rajamma

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr.justice n.anil kumar thursday, the 5th day of august 2021 / 14th sravana, 1943 rsa no. 906 of 2014 against the judgment and decree dated 29.02.2012 in as arising from the judgment and decree dated 30.08.2008 in o.s.no.226/2005 of the munsiff court, adoor appellant/respondent/plaintiff:subhadra, aged 48 years, d/o chellamma, kayarumuttathu thekkethil, vayala muri, erathu village, adoor, pathanamthitta district by adv sri.alias m.cherian respondents/appellants/defendants: 1 rajamma aged 55 years d/o chellamma, rajesh bhavanam, meloodu muri, peringanadu village, adoor, pathanamthitta district 691551 2 chellamma aged 82 years d/o parvathi amma, rajesh bhavanam, meloodu muri, peringanadu village, adoor, pathanamthitta district 691551 by adv sri.g.unnikrishnan this regular second appeal having come up for admission on 05.08.2021, the court on the same day delivered the following: ..2.. ,n. anil kumar, j.------------------------------------------- r.s.a.no.906 of 2014 --------------------------------------------- dated this the 5th day of august, 2021judgmentheard the learned counsel for the appellant.2. when this appeal has come up forconsideration, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the subject matter in this appeal is settled out of court between the parties. hence, a memo is filed stating that this appeal is not pressed. recording the memo, this appeal stands dismissed as not pressed. no costs.3. pending applications, if any, stand closed.an interim order of status quo was passed on 12.11.2014 in this case. the above order stands vacated. the registry is directed to communicate the judgment to ..3.. , the sub registrar, adoor and village officer, erathu in pathanamthitta district, in accordance with rules. sd/- n. anil kumar, judge kkj

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1943 RSA NO. 906 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.02.2012 IN AS ARISING FROM THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.08.2008 IN O.S.NO.226/2005 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, ADOOR APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:

SUBHADRA, AGED 48 YEARS, D/O CHELLAMMA, KAYARUMUTTATHU THEKKETHIL, VAYALA MURI, ERATHU VILLAGE, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT BY ADV SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS: 1 RAJAMMA AGED 55 YEARS D/O CHELLAMMA, RAJESH BHAVANAM, MELOODU MURI, PERINGANADU VILLAGE, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 691551 2 CHELLAMMA AGED 82 YEARS D/O PARVATHI AMMA, RAJESH BHAVANAM, MELOODU MURI, PERINGANADU VILLAGE, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 691551 BY ADV SRI.G.UNNIKRISHNAN THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..2.. ,

N. ANIL KUMAR, J.

------------------------------------------- R.S.A.No.906 of 2014 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of August, 2021

JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

2. When this appeal has come up for

consideration, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the subject matter in this appeal is settled out of court between the parties. Hence, a memo is filed stating that this appeal is not pressed. Recording the memo, this appeal stands dismissed as not pressed. No costs.

3. Pending applications, if any, stand closed.

An interim order of status quo was passed on 12.11.2014 in this case. The above order stands vacated. The Registry is directed to communicate the judgment to ..3.. , the Sub Registrar, Adoor and Village Officer, Erathu in Pathanamthitta District, in accordance with Rules. Sd/- N. ANIL KUMAR, JUDGE kkj

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial