IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2011 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1933 RSA.No. 940 of 2009() ------------------------------- AS.NO. 53/2000 of SUB COURT,NEYYATTINKARA OS.NO. 169/1998 of PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, NEYYATTINKARA .................... APPELLANTS/ RESPONDENTS 5, 6 & 7/ DEFENDANTS 5, 6 & LRS OF 1ST DEFENDANT ------------------------------- 1. AUGUSTIAN BALASUBRAMONYAN, SIVA BHAVAN, AMARAVILA, KEEZHKOLLA DESOM, CHENKAL VILLAGE. 2. VARTHINI SAKTHI, MAHADEVER BHAVAN, AUGASTYA SAWMY NAGAR, BALARAMAPURAM. 3. ACHIYAMMAL LAKSHMI AMMAL, IDAMALAKUZHI THOPPU BUNGLOW, SALIGOTHRA THERUVU, ANTHIYYOOR DESOM, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) SRI.A.R.DILEEP RESPONDENT(S)/ APPELLANT- RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4/ PLAINTIFF-DEFENDANTS 2 TO 4 --------------------------- 1. NAGAMMAL, G.G.BHAVAN, AMARAVILA, NARAYANAPURAM THERUVU, NADUVOORKOLLA DESOM, KOLLAYIL VILLAGE, HAVING ALSO THOPPU BUNGLOW, EDAMALAKUZHY, SALIGOTHRA THERUVU, BALARAMAPURAM, ANTHIYOOR DESOM, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE. 2. LEKSHMI AMMAL VALLI AMMAL, SIVA BHAVAN, AMARAVILA, KEEZHIIKOLLA DESOM, CHENKAL VILLAGE. 3. ARUN KUMAR, THOPPU BUNGLOW, EDAMALAKUZHY, BALARAMAPURAM. 4. JAYANTHI, DO. DO. R1 BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH R2 TO R4 BY ADV.SRI.G.RAJA CHANDRANATHAN THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J ........................................... RSA .NO.940 OF 2011 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 30th DAY OF MAY, 2011 JUDGMENT First respondent is the plaintiff. Appellants are defendants 5 and 6 and legal heirs of the first defendant. First respondent instituted O.S.169 of 1998 on the file of Principal Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara for declaration of title and permanent prohibitory injunction. The suit was dismissed. First respondent challenged the judgment before Sub Court, Neyyattinkara in A.S.53 of 2000. Learned Sub Judge allowed the appeal and granted a decree declaring the title of the first respondent to the plaint B schedule property and restrained the first defendant by a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction, though first defendant was no more at that time. As first defendant died, 7th respondent was impleaded as legal heir in the first appeal. Defendants 5 and 6 and the legal heir of first defendant, challenged the judgment in this appeal. Appeal was admitted formulating substantial questions of law. 2. Subsequently parties have settled the disputes amicably. RSA 940/2011 2 I.A.1131 of 2011 is filed under Rule 3 of Order XXIII of Code of Civil Procedure for recording the compromise stating that entire disputes were settled and first respondent plaintiff agreed to withdraw the claim and appellants and respondents agreed to sell the remaining property, excluding the properties described in clause (iii) and (iv). The compromise petition is signed by all the parties and their counsel. 3. Compromise is recorded. Appeal is disposed in terms of the compromise. The decree granted by Sub Court, Neyyattinkara in A.S.53 of 2000 stands set aside. The compromise petition forms part of the decree. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk