IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2009 / 28TH ASWINA 1931 RSA.No. 83 of 2009() -------------------- AS.177/1999 of I ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR OS.674/1996 of MUNSIFF COURT,CHAVAKKAD .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT ------------------------------------------------- (*)APPU, CHOWANNOOR VILLAGE DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK. (DIED) ADDL.APPELLANTS IMPLEADED: ADDL.A2. MALATHY, CHOWANNOOR VILLAGE DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK. ADDL.A3. KRISHNAN, CHOWANNOOR VILLAGE DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK. ADDL.A4. SUJA OF -DO- -DO- (ADDL.APPELLANT NOS.2 TO 4 ARE IMPLEADED AS LRS OF DECEASED APPELLANT AS PER ORDER DATED 8.7.2009 IN IA NO.139/2009) BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI SRI.RAHUL VENUGOPAL SMT.S.SIBHA RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF ----------------------------------- SKHARIACHAN, KANIPPAYYOOR VILLAGE DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK. ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH SRI.V.C.MADHAVANKUTTY THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- R.S.A.No.83 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2009. JUDGMENT Respondent appears through counsel. Heard both sides. Second Appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law: “Whether courts below have properly exercised the discretion vested in it while granting decree for specific performance in favour of the respondent?” 2. This appeal arises from judgment and decree of learned I Additional District Judge, Thrissur confirming judgment and decree for specific performance of an agreement for sale passed by learned Munsiff, Chavakkad in O.S.No. 674 of 1996. Appellant died during the pendency of appeal and his legal representatives are impleaded as additional appellants. 3. Additional appellants and respondent/plaintiff have filed I.A.No.2449 of 2009 reporting that the dispute has been settled between them outside court and requesting to pass a decree in terms of the compromise. As per the judgment and decree under challenge, a sale deed has already been executed by the court in favour of respondent. As per the terms of the compromise (vide I.A.No.2449 of 2009) additional appellants are to pay the sum RSA No.83/2009 2 of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rupees one lakh and twenty thousand only) to the respondent within three months from 14.10.2009 with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 14.10.2009 till payment of the amount. Other terms and conditions of the compromise are entered in I.A.No.2449 of 2009. I have heard both sides. The compromise is recorded. Resultantly, the Second Appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise. Compromise shall form part of the decree. On payment of the sum of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rupees one lakh and twenty thousand only) with interest as stated in I.A.No.2449 of 2009 within the time stipulated the judgment and decree of the courts below will stand set aside and the suit dismissed. On such payment it will be open to the parties or either of them to move the executing court to dispose of the execution petition in light of the compromise decree and request the court concerned to intimate the Sub Registrar before whom the sale deed was registered about the cancellation of the said sale deed as per the terms of the compromise. On disposal of the execution petition as aforesaid, the original document of title of original appellant produced by the respondent in the court concerned shall be returned to the additional appellants on application. In RSA No.83/2009 3 case the payment as stated in I.A.No.2449 of 2009 is not made within the time stipulated, this appeal will stand dismissed in confirmation of the judgment and decree under challenge. No cost. I.A.No.141 of 2009 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks