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.

Sreenivasan vs Mami

Sreenivasan vs MAMI

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Jul 22, 2019
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1904476

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/381/2004

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sreenivasan

Respondent

MAMI

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr. justice p.somarajan monday, the 22nd day of july 2019 / 31st ashadha, 1941 rsa.no.381 of 2004 (d) against the decree & judgment dated 13-08-2003 in as no.36/1997 of additional sub court, irinjalakuda against the decree & judgment dated 14-11-1996 in os no.298/1995 of munsiff court, kodungallur appellants/appellants/plaintiffs: 1 sreenivasan, s/o tharayil velayudhan, 2 sugathan, s/o tharayil velayudhan, 3 renuka, d/o tharayil velayudhan, 4 usha, d/o tharayil velayudhan, 5 narayani, mother of appellants 1 to 4 (died) 6 nandini, w/o devadas, (s/o velayudhan), 7 dhinamani, d/o devadas, 8 deesh, s/o devadas, by adv. sri.v.m.krishnakumar respondents/respondents/defendants: 1 mami, s/o tharayil kannappan, 2 anandan, s/o tharayil velayudhan, r.s.a.no.381 of 2004 2 3 devaky, w/o tharayil velappan, 4 vijayan, s/o tharayil velappan and 3rd respondent, 5 baby, d/o tharayil velappan and 3rd respondent, 6 asokan, s/o tharayil velappan and 3rd respondent, 7 radhamani, d/o tharayil velappan and 3rd respondent, -do- -do- 8 nandanan, s/o kaithavalappil madhavan, 9 babu, s/o -do- -do- 10 prahladan, s/o -do- -do- 11 mohanan, s/o -do- -do- 12 sankaran, s/o ponath sankaran, -do- -do-. this regular second appeal having been finally heard on 22.07.2019. the court on the same day delivered the following: r.s.a.no.381 of 2004 3judgmentthe learned counsel for the appellants fairly submitted that there is no instruction from the party concerned. hence, the second appeal is dismissed for non prosecution. sd/- p.somarajan dmr/- judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2019 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1941 RSA.No.381 of 2004 (D) AGAINST THE DECREE & JUDGMENT DATED 13-08-2003 IN AS No.36/1997 of ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA AGAINST THE DECREE & JUDGMENT DATED 14-11-1996 IN OS No.298/1995 of MUNSIFF COURT, KODUNGALLUR APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS: 1 SREENIVASAN, S/o THARAYIL VELAYUDHAN, 2 SUGATHAN, S/o THARAYIL VELAYUDHAN, 3 RENUKA, D/o THARAYIL VELAYUDHAN, 4 USHA, D/o THARAYIL VELAYUDHAN, 5 NARAYANI, MOTHER OF APPELLANTS 1 TO 4 (DIED) 6 NANDINI, W/o DEVADAS, (S/o VELAYUDHAN), 7 DHINAMANI, D/o DEVADAS, 8 DEESH, S/o DEVADAS, BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: 1 MAMI, S/o THARAYIL KANNAPPAN, 2 ANANDAN, S/o THARAYIL VELAYUDHAN, R.S.A.No.381 of 2004 2 3 DEVAKY, W/o THARAYIL VELAPPAN, 4 VIJAYAN, S/o THARAYIL VELAPPAN AND 3RD RESPONDENT, 5 BABY, D/o THARAYIL VELAPPAN AND 3RD RESPONDENT, 6 ASOKAN, S/o THARAYIL VELAPPAN AND 3RD RESPONDENT, 7 RADHAMANI, D/o THARAYIL VELAPPAN AND 3RD RESPONDENT, -DO- -DO- 8 NANDANAN, S/o KAITHAVALAPPIL MADHAVAN, 9 BABU, S/o -DO- -DO- 10 PRAHLADAN, S/o -DO- -DO- 11 MOHANAN, S/o -DO- -DO- 12 SANKARAN, S/o PONATH SANKARAN, -DO- -DO-. THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.07.2019. THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.S.A.No.381 of 2004 3

JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellants fairly submitted that there is no instruction from the party concerned. Hence, the second appeal is dismissed for non prosecution. Sd/- P.SOMARAJAN DMR/- JUDGE

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial