IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2009 / 22ND ASHADHA 1931 SA.No. 926 of 1998(B) --------------------- AS.325/1993 of DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR OS.273/1991 of M.C.,VADAKKANCHERRY .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS ------------------------------------------------------- 1. C.S.VIJAYALAKSHMI AGED 36 YEARS ` W/O PADINJARE MADATHIL C.N.NATARAJAN MUKARIKUNNU DESOM. CHELAKKARA VILLAGE THALAPPILLY TALUK 2. C.N.MANGALAMBAL (MINOR) D/O PADINJARE MADATHIL C.N. NATARAJAN MUKARIKUNNU DESOM. CHELAKKARA VILLAGE THALAPPILLY TALUK 3. C.N.NARAYANAN (MINOR) S/O PADINJARE MADATHIL C.N. NATARAJAN MUKARIKUNNU DESOM. CHELAKKARA VILLAGE THALAPPILLY TALUK 4. C.N.SEETHARAMAN (MINOR) S/O PADINJARE MADATHIL C.N. NATARAJAN MUKARIKUNNU DESOM. CHELAKKARA VILLAGE THALAPPILLY TALUK (FIRST APPELLANTS IS THE GUARDIAN OF MINOR PLAINTIFFS 2 TO 4 ) BY ADV. SRI.P.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.MADHU RADHAKRISHNAN SMT.MEERA RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. RAJALAKSHMI D/O LAKSHMIKUTTY AMMA LAKSHMI BHAVANAM , KITANAYAM MURIYIL NOORANADU VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK 2. LAKSHMIKUTTY AMMA LAKSHMI BHAVANAM , KITANAYAM MURIYIL NOORANADU VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) FOR R1-2 SRI.A.R.DILEEP FOR R1-2 0 SMT.KAVITHA GANGADHARAN FOR R1-2 THIS SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ---------------------------------------- S.A.No. 926 of 1998 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT The Second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in A.S. No. 325/1993 on the file of the District Court, Thrissur which arises from the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 273/1991 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Wadakkanchery. The suit was filed for perpetual prohibitory injunction. The trial court granted a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property or starting residence in their house or from committing any act or waste or causing hindrance to the plaintiffs' possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule items. In the appeal filed by the defendants as A.S. No. 325/1993, the lower appellate court set aside the trial court's judgment and decree and allowed the said appeal Hence the Second Appeal. The parties hereinafter referred to as plaintiffs and defendants. 2. When the matter was taken up for final hearing, it is reported by the counsel that the parties have entered into an agreement and settled all the disputes between them. It is also reported that the parties filed I.A No. 1333/2009 praying to pass a decree in terms of the compromise as stipulated in the said I.A. and to dispose of the Second Appeal S.A. No. 926 of 1998 -2- 3. On a reading of the above said I.A. I find that the plaintiffs and defendants have settled the subject matter of the suit and the appeal out of court and all the terms of compromise are recited . The terms of compromise are hereby recorded and shall form part of the decree and judgment. Accordingly a decree as prayed for is passed in terms of compromise as stipulated in the said I.A and the Second Appeal is disposed of. The plaintiffs/appellants are entitled to refund of ½ of the Court fee paid. (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) es. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. --------------------------- S.A.No. 926 of 1998 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 13th July, 2009