Chandrika vs Krishnan - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1663630
CourtKerala Orders High Court
Decided OnFeb-23-2021
Case NumberRSA/546/2017
JudgeHonourable Mr.Justice N.Anil Kumar
AppellantChandrika
RespondentKrishnan
Excerpt:
rsa.no.546 of 2017 as 334/2011 of i additional district court, palakkad w/o. arumughan, sreeniketham veettil, chandranagar post - 678 007, kunnannur amsom, pirivusala, palakkad taluk and district. 1 krishnan s/o. nagan, aged 58 years, kottappadikkal veettil, mankara amsom and desom mankara post - 678 613 palakkad taluk and district. 2 sreedharan s/o. krishnan, aged 39 years, kottappadikkal veettil,mankara amsom and desom mankara post - 678 613 palakkad taluk and district. r1-2 by adv. sri.rajesh sivaramankuttyother present: sri.rajesh sivaramankutty 23.02.2021, along with rsa.569/2017, the court on the same day ..2.. rsa.no.569 of 2017 as 335/2011 of i additional district court, palakkad w/o.arumughan, sreeniketham veettil, chandranagar post 678 007, kunnannur amsom, pirivusala, 1 sreedharan s/o.krishnan, aged 39 years, kottappadikkal veettil, mankara amsom and desom, mankara post 678 613 2 krishnan s/o.nagan, aged 58 years, kottappadikkal veettil, mankara amsom and desom, mankara post 678 613 r1 by adv. sri.rajesh sivaramankutty r1-2 by adv. sri.r.harikrishnan r1 by adv. sri.e.ramachandran 23.02.2021, along with rsa.546/2017, the court on the same day ..3..judgmentthe learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo dated 10.02.2021 in both the appeals, stating that the appellant does not want to prosecute the appeal further and therefore, the appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn. recording the memo, the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. there would be no order as to costs. pending applications, if any, stand closed. sd/- n.anil kumar judge bka/23.02.2021
Judgment:

RSA.No.546 OF 2017 AS 334/2011 OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD W/O. ARUMUGHAN, SREENIKETHAM VEETTIL, CHANDRANAGAR POST - 678 007, KUNNANNUR AMSOM, PIRIVUSALA, PALAKKAD TALUK AND DISTRICT. 1 KRISHNAN S/O. NAGAN, AGED 58 YEARS, KOTTAPPADIKKAL VEETTIL, MANKARA AMSOM AND DESOM MANKARA POST - 678 613 PALAKKAD TALUK AND DISTRICT. 2 SREEDHARAN S/O. KRISHNAN, AGED 39 YEARS, KOTTAPPADIKKAL VEETTIL,MANKARA AMSOM AND DESOM MANKARA POST - 678 613 PALAKKAD TALUK AND DISTRICT. R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY

OTHER PRESENT: SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY 23.02.2021, ALONG WITH RSA.569/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY ..2.. RSA.No.569 OF 2017 AS 335/2011 OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD W/O.ARUMUGHAN, SREENIKETHAM VEETTIL, CHANDRANAGAR POST 678 007, KUNNANNUR AMSOM, PIRIVUSALA, 1 SREEDHARAN S/O.KRISHNAN, AGED 39 YEARS, KOTTAPPADIKKAL VEETTIL, MANKARA AMSOM AND DESOM, MANKARA POST 678 613 2 KRISHNAN S/O.NAGAN, AGED 58 YEARS, KOTTAPPADIKKAL VEETTIL, MANKARA AMSOM AND DESOM, MANKARA POST 678 613 R1 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.R.HARIKRISHNAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.E.RAMACHANDRAN 23.02.2021, ALONG WITH RSA.546/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY ..3..

JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo dated 10.02.2021 in both the appeals, stating that the appellant does not want to prosecute the appeal further and therefore, the appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn. Recording the memo, the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. There would be no order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, stand closed. Sd/- N.ANIL KUMAR JUDGE Bka/23.02.2021