CR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN WEDNESDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 18TH MAGHA, 1945 RSA NO. 824 OF 2020 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT AS 86/2015 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - IV, KOTTAYAM / II ADDITIONAL MACT, KOTTAYAM OS 583/2010 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/PRINCIPAL SUB COURT / COMMERCIAL COURT, KOTTAYAM APPELLANT/S:

KRISHNAKUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS S/O.RAGHAVAN NAIR, THEKKEPARAMBIL (FROM DHANUSHKODI) HOUSE, THRIKODITHANAM KARA, THRIKODITHANAM VILLAGE,CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM BY ADV C. RAJENDRAN B.K.GOPALAKRISHNANB RESPONDENT/S:

G.GOPAKUMAR,AGED 53 YEARS, S/O. PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, PROPRIETOR G-4, PROPERTIES, AMBOORAN BUILDINGS, MANORAMA JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM, RESIDING AT GAYATHIRMADAOM, KILIROOR KARA, THIRUVARPPU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM-686

020 BY ADV G.GOPAKUMAR(Party-In-Person)

THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.02.2024, ALONG WITH RSA.21/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN WEDNESDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 18TH MAGHA, 1945 RSA NO. 21 OF 2021 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT AS 85/2015 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - IV, KOTTAYAM / II ADDITIONAL MACT, KOTTAYAM OS 183/2012 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/PRINCIPAL SUB COURT / COMMERCIAL COURT, KOTTAYAM APPELLANT/S:

KRISHNAKUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS S/O.RAGHVAN NAIR, THEKKEPARAMBIL (FROM DHANUSHKODI) HOUSE, THRIKODITHANAM KARA, THRIKODITHANAM VILLAGE, CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM.

BY ADV C. RAJENDRAN B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT/S:

G.GOPAKUMAR AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, PROPRIETOR G-4 PROPERTIES, AMBOORAN BUILDINGS, MANORAMA JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM, RESIDING AT GAYATHRIMADOM, KILIROOR KARA, THIRUVARPPU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM - 686 020.

BY ADV G.GOPAKUMAR(Party-In-Person)

THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.02.2024, ALONG WITH RSA.824/2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CR A.BADHARUDEEN, J.

======================================================

R.S.A.Nos.824 of 2020 & 21 of 2021 =============================================================

Dated this the 7^th day of February, 2024

J U D G M E N T

R.S.A.No.824 of 2020 has been filed under Section 100 r/w Order XLII of the Code of Civil Procedure, challenging the decree and judgment in O.S.No.583 of 2010 dated 26.02.2015 on the files of Sub Court, Kottayam and the decree and judgment in A.S.No.86 of 2015 dated 06.01.2020 on the files of the Additional District Judge, Kottayam. The appellant is the defendant in the suit – Sri.Krishnakumar. The respondent herein is the plaintiff in the suit – Sri.G.Gopakumar.

2. R.S.A.No.21 of 2021 is also filed by Sri.Krishnakumar, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.183/2012 on the files of the Sub Court, Kottayam, challenging the decree and judgment of the above said order dated 26.02.2015 and confirmed by the decree and judgment in A.S.No.85 of 2015 dated

06.01.2020 on the files of Additional District Judge, Kottayam.

Sri.Gopakumar is the respondent herein also.

3. I shall refer the parties as ‘appellant’ and ‘respondent’

(their status in this second appeal) hereinafter for convenience.

4. At the time of admission of R.S.A.No.824/2020, my predecessor, as per order dated 20^th October, 2022, framed the following substantial questions of law.

(i) Whether the suit filed for injunction without prayer of declaration is maintainable in law?

(ii) Whether the judgment and decree passed by the courts below is perverse due to mis-appreciation of evidence?

Similarly, at the time of admission of R.S.A.No.21/2021, as per order dated 20^th October 2022, framed the following substantial questions of law.

(i) Whether the findings that the suit is barred by limitation is legally sustainable?

(ii) Whether the judgment and decree passed by the courts below is perverse due to mis-appreciation of evidence?

5. Heard; Sri. C. Rajendran, the learned counsel for the appellant and