IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA WEDNESDAY, THE 26^TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 5TH ASHADHA, 1946 RSA NO. 316 OF 2024 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.11.2022 IN AS NO.61 OF 2021 OF DISTRICT COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.02.2021 IN OS NO.1185 OF 2007 OF MUNSIFF COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS:

1 RAVEENDRAN, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.DEVAKI, RESIDING AT TC.NO.3/1824, VITHARUTHANVILA VEEDU, KIZHAKKUMKARA, KULATHOOR, ATTIPRA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695 583.

2 SINDHU, AGED 51 YEARS, W/O.RAVEENDRAN, RESIDING AT TC.NO.3/1824, VITHARUTHANVILA VEEDU, KIZHAKKUMKARA, KULATHOOR, ATTIPRA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695 583.

BY ADVS.

G.P.SHINOD GOVIND PADMANAABHAN AJIT G ANJARLEKAR ATUL MATHEWS GAYATHRI S.B.

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:

1 RAJENDRAN, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O. BHASKARAN, REJU BHAVAN, 16TH STONE (ISRO)

JUNCTION, CHULLIMANOOR, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 541.

2 JAYAKUMARI, AGED 51 YEARS, W/O. RAJENDRAN, REJU BHAVAN, 16TH STONE (ISRO)

JUNCTION, CHULLIMANOOR, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 541.

3 HARILAL, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.KUNJUKRISHNAN, VARIYAKKUDI VEETTIL, KULATHOOR PO, VYIKKALATHU MURI, ATTIPRA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 583.

4 LAL K., AGED 71 YEARS, S/O.KUTTAN, NEDIYAVARUVILA VEEDU, VENKULAM DESAM, EDAVA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 583.

THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

C.S.SUDHA, J.

----------------------------------

R.S.A.No.316 of 2024 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26^th day of June 2024

J U D G M E N T

This second appeal under Section 100 read with Order XLII Rule 1 CPC filed by the plaintiffs/appellants is against the judgment and decree dated 30/11/2022 in A.S.No.61/2021 on the file of the District Court, Thiruvananthapuram, which appeal in turn is against the judgment and decree dated 03/02/2021 in O.S.No.1185/2007 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The parties and the documents will be referred to as described in O.S.No.1185/2007.

2. The suit was one for declaration of title, possession and consequential reliefs. The first plaintiff and the second defendant are the children of late Devaki, the original owner of the plaint schedule property. Devaki executed Ext.A2(B1) settlement deed dated 29.02.1980 as per which 5½ cents each was given to the first plaintiff as well as the second defendant. On the request of Devaki, the 5½ cents obtained by the first plaintiff was disposed of for the benefit of the family. The sale proceeds was utilised for the benefit of the second defendant and in consideration for the same, the 5½ cents of the property obtained by the second defendant as per Ext.A2(B1) was given to the first plaintiff, whereby the first plaintiff became the absolute owner in possession of the property. The first plaintiff constructed a building in the property and started residing their along with his family. The second defendant as well as Devaki had agreed to execute a sale deed with respect to the share of second defendant in favour of the first plaintiff. The first plaintiff had even pledged the property for availing a loan for the second defendant. On 16/07/2017, the second defendant and her relatives made an attempt to trespass into the plaint schedule property. The attempt was foiled by the timely intervention of the plaintiffs. The second defendant in the year 1984 itself had transferred possession of the plaint schedule property to the first plaintiff, who has ever since been in possession and enjoyment of the property as an absolute owner. The defendants have never been in possession of the property thereafter. The second defendant had also received sale consideration of the property from the first plaintiff. If at all the second defendant had any right in the property and the same is