IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 2ND AUGUST 2010 / 11TH SRAVANA 1932 AS.No. 742 of 1995(C) -------------------------------- OS.436/1990 of ADDL.SUB COURT, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT(S): LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF PLAINTIFF ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. BEEPATHUKUTTY, W/O. ABUBACKER, AGED 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT THENODE HOUSE, VAVULLIAPURAM AMSOM AND DESOM, ALATHUR TALUK. 2. ABUBACKER, S/O. VELLATHIAYI ALIAS VEERANKUTTY, THENODE HOUSE, VAVULLIAPURAM AMSOM AND DESOM, ALATHUR TALUK. 3. SHAJITHA, W/O. LATE ANFARDHEEN, AGED 24 YEARS, THENODE HOUSE, VAVULLIAPURAM AMSOM AND DESOM , ALATHUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH RESPONDENT(S): 2ND DEFENDANT & LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF IST ----------------------- DEFENDANT 1. AVA UMMA, D/O. KUNJUMMA, RESIDING AT OLIPPARA, ADIPPERNDA, THIRUVAZHIYODE AMSOM, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. SARAHA UMMA, W/O. ALI AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT PUNNAPPADAM, KIZHAKKANCHERRY AMSOM, ALATHUR TALUK. R1 & R2 BY ADVS.SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN SRI.D.KRISHNA PRASAD THIS APPEAL SUITS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... A.S.NO.742 OF 1995 ............................................. Dated this the 2nd day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Palakkad in O.S.No.436/1990. The suit is one for specific performance of a contract and the court below granted a decree for realisation of the amount of Rs.25,000/= from the defendants. Dissatisfied with the refusal to grant a decree for specific performance, the plaintiff has come up in appeal. 2. The original plaintiff died and his legal representatives are the appellants. Similarly the original first defendant also died and her legal representatives are the present respondents namely Ava Umma and Saraha Umma. 3. Parties have filed a compromise petition and as per the same, out of one acre and 20 cents of double crop land, appellants are entitled to retain possession of 50 cents of property situated on the eastern side and the remaining 70 cents property in item 1 and 20 cents of property in item 2 : 2 : A.S.NO.742 OF 1995 are to be given back to the respondents in the appeal. It is also recited therein that when a conveyance deed is executed to transfer 50 cents of land situated on the eastern side of item 1 of plaint schedule property, the respondents will give back possession of 70 cents of item 1 situated on the western side and 20 cents covered by item 2. If parties do not heed to compromise, the parties who are aggrieved, is entitled to move the court for implementation of the decree. On the basis of the compromise, a revised decree is passed as follows: i. The judgment and decree of the trial court only granting money decree are set aside. ii. The respondents in the appeal are directed to execute an assignment deed with respect to 50 cents of land comprised in item 1 on the eastern side within a period of two months from today in favour of the appellants. iii. On the date of execution of the said assignment deed the appellants are directed to put back the defendants in possession of 70 cents of land in item 1 of the plaint schedule (western side) and 20 cents covered by item 2. : 3 : A.S.NO.742 OF 1995 iv. In case of non compliance, parties are at liberty to put the decree into execution through court. v. Parties are directed to bear their respective costs. Refund of half court fee is allowed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. cl : 4 : A.S.NO.742 OF 1995 M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... A.S.NO.742 OF 1995 ............................................. 2nd day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T