IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 15TH BHADRA 1933 RSA.No. 102 of 2011() --------------------- AS.32/2008 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, N. PARAVUR OS.323/2006 of MUNSIFF COURT,ALUVA .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ DEFENDANT ------------------------------------------------------- A.P.SIVADASAN , AGED 55 YEARS AMBATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHENGAMANADU PO ALUVA PIN 683 578. BY ADV. SRI.SREEJITH S.NAIR RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF ---------------------------------------------------------------- A.S.JOBY, AGED 35 YEARS S/O.SOURU, ARUPUDAM, KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE CHERANALLOOR KARA, KOOVAPPADY PO, PIN 683 544. ADV. SRI.JAISON JOSEPH FOR R1 THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== R.S.A. No. 102 OF 2011 =========================== Dated this the 6th day of September,2011 JUDGMENT The defendant in O.S.No.323/2006 on the file of Munsiff Court, Aluva is the appellant. Plaintiff is the respondent. Suit was filed for realisation of Rs.85,000/- with interest allegedly received by the appellant in connection with the visa transaction. Learned Munsiff granted a decree permitting the respondent to realise Rs.85,000/- with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the suit. Appellant challenged the decree before Additional District Court, North Paravur in A.S.32/2008. Learned Additional District Judge on reappreciation of evidence confirmed the findings of the learned Munsiff and dismissed the appeal. The appeal was filed challenging the concurrent decree. RSA 102/2011 2 2. The appeal was filed with a petition under section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay. Respondent plaintiff appeared in that application. The delay was condoned. As per order dated 5.8.2011 accepting the submission of the counsel appearing for the appellant and the respondent the case was sent for mediation to Kerala Mediation Centre. 3. Before the Mediation Centre both appellant and respondent appeared. On mediation there was settlement of the dispute between the parties. A memorandum of mediation settlement agreement under section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure read and Rule 24 of Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2008 was forwarded by the mediator. Memorandum of mediation settlement is signed both by the appellant and the respondent and their respective counsel. 4. In view of the settlement, the appeal is allowed and the decree granted by the trial court as confirmed by the first appellate court is RSA 102/2011 3 modified in terms of the memorandum of mediation settlement agreement executed by the appellant and the respondent. The memorandum of mediation settlement will form part of the decree. Refund the court fee paid. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006