SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 45411

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
AMRUTHAKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
MOHANANPILLAI – Respondent
RSA 1050/2017



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1944 RSA NO. 1050 OF 2017 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.08.2017 IN AS 63/2014 OF III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, ALAPPUZHA WHICH IS AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN OS 336/2011 DATED 18.06.2014 OF SUB COURT,ALAPPUZHA APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS IN A.S./DEFENDANTS NO.2, 4 AND 7TH IN O.S:

1 AMRUTHAKUMAR AGED 58 YEARS S/O.MADHAVAN KUNJU PANICKER, AGED 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT SOWPARNIKA, 32/2156, P.J.ANTONY ROAD, EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM.

2 KUSUMAKUMARI W/O.KRISHNAN KUNJU PANICKER, AGED 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT SOGANTHIKAM, SANATHANAPURAM P.O., KALARCODE, ALAPPUZHA.

3 AJITHA KUMARI W/O.AJAYAKUMAR, AGED 55 YEARS, NAVANEETHAM, VALAMANGOLOM NORTH, THURAVOOR, ALAPPUZHA.

BY ADVS.

SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR SMT.V.SHYLAJA RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE A.S/PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANT NO.1,3,5,6 AND 8TH IN O.S.:

1 MOHANANPILLAI S/O.MADHAVAN KUNJU PANICKER, AGED 69 YEARS, PULIMUTTATHUVEETTIL,, KOYIPURAM VILLAGE, CHENGANNOOR, ALLEPPEY.

2 SARALA KUMARI W/O.KESAVA PILLAI, AGED 73 YEARS, RESIDING AT KRW

45, EDAPPALLY, PALARIVATTOM P.O., COCHIN-25, ERNAKULAM.

3 REGHUKUMAR S/O.MADHAVAN KUNJU PANICKER, AGED 63 YEARS, ANANDA BHAVANAM, KUTHIYATHODE P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA.

4 ANILKUMAR S/O.MADHAVAN KUNJU PANICKER, AGED 53 YEARS, "ASWATHI", EDAPPALLY, PALARIVATTOM P.O., COCHIN-

25, ERNAKULAM.

5 JALAJA KUMARI W/O.SIVASANKARAN NAIR, AGED 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT POURNAMI, MARUTHORVATTOM, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA.

6 RETNA KUMARI W/O.MOHANAN NAIR, AGED 66 YEARS, "THRIPTHI", CHERUVARANOM P.O., VARANOM, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA.

7 JAYADEVAN S/O.VASUDEVAN PILLAI, AGED 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT GEETHANJALI, PATTANAKKADU P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

BY ADVS.

SRI.T.B.HOOD AND SMT.M.ISHA FOR R1 AND R2 SRI.GEORGE MATHEW AND HARIHARAPUTHRAN - R5 TO 7 THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 03.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

M.R.ANITHA, J ****************** R.S.A.No.1050 of 2017 --------------------------------------------

Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2023

JUDGMENT

The Regular Second Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.63 of 2014 on the file of III Additional District Judge, Alappuzha which in turn arise out of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.336/2001 on the file of Sub Court, Attingal.

2. Appellants are defendants 2, 4 and 7. (Parties would hereafter be referred as per their status before the trial court). The suit is one for declaration, partition and permanent prohibitory injunction. Plaintiffs and defendant Nos.1 to 7 are siblings and defendant No.8 is the nephew of plaintiffs and defendant Nos.1 to 7. Parties got plaint schedule item Nos.1 and 2 properties by virtue of settlement deed No.3066/1993 dated

11.10.1993 of Pulincunnu S.R.O. Plaint A schedule was allotted to the first plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 3 and plaint B schedule property was allotted to the second plaintiff and defendant Nos. 4 to 8. Settlement deed has been executed by the mother of the plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 7 and the maternal grandmother of 8th defendant. Mother retained her life interest over the plaint schedule properties. There is a residential building in the property where nobody has been residing over the last eight years. She had been suffering from various old age diseases and was totally bed ridden due to paralysis and she had been admitted to KVM Hospital, Cherthala from 06.07.2011 to 31.07.2011. After discharge from the hospital also she was fully bed ridden and was residing with the second defendant. She died on 12.10.2011 and after that, second defendant claimed absolute right over the schedule properties under the guise of cancellation deed No.2376 dated 26.08.2011 to revoke the settlement deed. On the same day, another settlement deed No.2377 was also got executed in the name of second defendant through undue influence and playing fraud upon the mother Thankamma. The revocation deed as well as settlement dee

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top