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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 3311

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J
SAJU MATHEWS – Appellant
Versus
SUJA SUSAN MATHEWS – Respondent
RFA NO. 182 OF 2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW (SR.), SRI.ARUN THOMAS, SRI.JENNIS STEPHEN, SRI.VIJAY V. PAUL, SMT.KARTHIKA MARIA, SMT.VEENA RAVEENDRAN, SRI.ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL
For the Respondents: SHRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH, SRI.K.P. ANTONY BINU

Mediation settlements under Section 89 of the CPC can finalize disputes effectively, requiring clear rights and obligations from parties.

Headnote:The judgment addresses a settlement under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, wherein the parties resolved their disputes through mediation. The court acknowledged the memorandum of agreement and decided to dispose of the appeal accordingly. The main issues involved included the division of properties and payment provisions between the parties as outlined in the mediation agreement. The court recognized each party's exclusive rights and responsibilities concerning the properties. The agreement was deemed a full and final resolution of all disputes, reiterated with all pending applications closed.

Table of Content
1. the court reinforces binding terms and conditions of mediation agreements. (Para 2)
2. finalization of settlement leads to disposal of the appeal. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

It is submitted by the counsel on both sides that the matter is settled between the parties by recourse to Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, on a reference made by this Court for mediation by the Mediation Centre, High Court of Kerala, by order dated 22.08.2025. 2. The Mediator has submitted a memorandum of agreement along with the report.

In the light of the said memorandum of agreement, this appeal is disposed of. The memorandum of agreement shall form part of this judgment. All pending applications shall stand closed.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE SB BEFORE THE HONOuFt.ABLE rdiGH Coui¥T oF KERAIA AIT ERNAKULAM RFA No.182 of 2019 Saju Mathews Appellant Vs Respondent Suja Susan Mathews #?,#LNDPTac°EFDtGREEERMEFUw|PERE=E:'°2N489oPFLHEEff PROCEDUFIE FLNAT[¥E DI.,SPU,TE Ru,LES 2,00S.

Terms of Partition

1. The Appellant shall be entitled to t:he properties it:em no.1, item no. 2 and item no. 3 specifically described in Schedule A, including all rights, title, interest, and benefits attached thereto. The Appellant shall have full and exclusive possession, enjoyment, and control over the said properties, free from any interference, claim, or encumbrance attributable to the Respondent.

2. The ftespendent shalt be ent:itled to the propet.ties item No. 4 and item no. 5 described in Schedule A and item No.1 contained in Schedule 8 below, including all rights, title, interest, and benefits attached thereto. The Respondent shall have full and exclusive po\ssession, enjoyment, and control over the said properties, free from any interference, claim, or encumbrance attributable to the Appellant.

Respondeflt `...` .. .

•;:...:.`.. Suja Susan athews

trt.f\dy`*rty'

-2-

3. The Appellant agrees to forfeit all rights, t:itle, int:erest, and benefit:s attached thereto, in item No.4 and item No.5 contained in Schedule A and it:em No.1 contained in Schedule 8. Item No.1 contajned in Schedule 8 is currently active and the appellant shall take steps to make it operational in case, State Bank of Travancore, Thripunithara Branch requires clarification or Non Objection Certificate from the appellant.

The Respondent agrees to forfeit all rights, title, interest, and benefits attached thereto, in item No.1, item No.2 and item No.3 specifically described in Schedule A along with Residential house (Building lD:- 30194010031584) contained in item No.1 and common pathway to item No.1 and item No.2 including all rights, title, interest and benefits attached heret:o.

Item No.2 contained in Schedule 8 was closed and non-existent before institution of Suit OS No. 174/2016 before the Honourable Subordinate Court:, Ernakulam and hence item No.2 remains non-existent and both Appellant and Respondent agree to not stake any claim regarding the same.

Additionally, a consideration of Rs.6,00,000/- shall be paid by the Appellant to the Respondent by way of Demand Draft with DD No. 023193 dated 15-01-2026 payable in favour of the Respondent, on the date of execution of this agreement dated 16-01-2026. True copy of the Demand Draft with DD No. 023193 dated 15-01-2026 is being annexed herewith this mediation agreement. It is agreed between the parties that the encashment of the abovesaid demand draft shall be done after the decree is pronounced by the Honourable High Court of Kerala and when this agreement forms part of the decree.

Respondent •:.,.-...-`

Sujasusa#;

thews -3-

7. Both parties undertake to execute, sign, and complete all necessary documentation, including but not limited to affidavits, declarations, and forms required for purpose of registration and mutation of the properties as mentioned above, as and when required.

8. Each party shall be entitled to separate possession and peaceful enjoyment of their respective shares as per this agreement which forms part of the decree passed by

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top