IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2008 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1929 CRP.No. 195 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08/02/2008 IN IA 1995/07 IN AS.25/2006 of SUB COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 ------------------------------------------------- 1. JOSEPH P.KOCHUKUDY, AGED 82 YEARS, S/O. PAILY, KOCHUKUDIYIL HOUSE, VADAKKAN MARADY KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. 2. K.J.POULOSE, S/O. JOSEPH, KOCHUKUDIYIL HOUSE, VADAKKAN MARADY KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI SRI.A.S.SAJUSH PAUL RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS/3RD RESPONDENT --------------------------------------- 1. JAFAR SADIQUE, S/O. ADAM ROWTHER, PADINJAREKUDY PUTHENPURAYIL, RAMAMANGALAM KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. 2. P.A.ABDUL RAZZAK, S/O. ADAM ROWTHER, PADINJAREKUDY PUTHENPURAYIL, RAMAMANGALAM KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. 3. P.A.SIRAJUDHEEN, S/O. ADAM ROWTHER, PADINJAREKUDY PUTHENPURAYIL, RAMAMANGALAM KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. 4. ADAM ROWTHER, S/O. MEERAN ROWTHER, PADINJAREKUDY PUTHENPURAYIL, RAMAMANGALAM KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ---------------------- C.R.P.No. 195 OF 2008 ----------------------------- DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2008 O R D E R This writ petition is preferred against the order of the Subordinate Judge, Muvattupuzha in I.A.No.1995/07 in A.S.No.25/06. It was an application for permission to withdraw the suit, O.S.No.421/02 of the Munsiff Court, Muvattupuzha and also the appeal which is filed against the said judgment and decree as A.S.25/06 before the Sub Court. A perusal of the order would reveal that O.S.No.421/02 is to set aside the judgments and decree in O.S.No.430/98 and O.S.No.629/98 of the Munsiff Court, Muvattupuzha. The said suits were compromised. The challenge in O.S.No.431/02 is to the effect that the compromise decree is obtained by playing fraud on the defendant. Now it is raised that O.S.No.421/02 pending in appeal is not maintainable since they ought to have filed applications in O.S.No.430/98 and O.S.No.629/98 before the Munsiff Court, Muvattupuzha which compromised the decree. Counter was filed by the other side CRP.195/08 2 opposing the same. The Court below on a consideration granted permission to withdraw the suit as well as the appeal. It has to be stated that by abandoning the suit, the party is resorting to put the litigation into the prior state before the institution of O.S.No.421/02. The court had adjudicated and found regarding the prayer that it is not possible to invalidate the decree challenged. So, under those circumstances, the Court granted permission to withdraw the suit as well as the appeal. I make it clear that when permission is granted to withdraw the suit as well as the appeal without permission to have recourse to the same by another suit, it concludes the matter and it will not open up a new seen of litigation if the party wants. By abandoning the suit in the form of withdrawal of the suit, puts an end to that cause of action and therefore making it clear, I dismiss this Civil Revision Petition. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE. dsn