IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
T.R. RAVI, J
Haseena – Appellant
Versus
Sri.Saifudeen Thangal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. original petition seeks to set aside a decree. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments establish no basis for claims of collusion. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
JUDGMENT
The original petition has been filed seeking to set aside Ext.P5 decree based on a compromise arrived at between the respondents. There is also a prayer to direct the Sub Court, Kollam to restore O.S.No.2/2014 and decide the suit on merits based on Ext.P4 written statement. The petitioner is the wife of the 2nd respondent judgment debtor. The 1st respondent is the decree holder. The suit was filed by the 1st respondent against the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. The matter was referred for mediation. The suit was one for specific performance and as per the compromise, the decree holder agreed to settle the matter by receiving ₹11,50,000/- from the 2nd respondent. The claim against the petitioner was given up by the decree holder as can be seen from Ext.P5. When the 2nd respondent failed to comply with the decree, 1st respondent filed execution petition. Ext.P6 is the copy of the execution petition without the schedule. The petitioner submits that the petitioner is not in good terms with the 2nd respondent and had filed M.C.No
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.