LAWS(KER)-2002-10-40

N SWAMINATHAN Vs. N ANANTHARAMA SUBRAMANIAM

Decided On October 07, 2002
N.SWAMINATHAN Appellant
V/S
N.ANANTHARAMA SUBRAMANIAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S. No. 446/2000 on the file of the First Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram, is the revision petitioner. The suit was filed for partition. The plaintiff claimed 5/12 shares over the Plaint A and C schedule properties and 1/4 share in Plaint B schedule property. During the pendency of the suit, the parties settled the matter among themselves out of Court and therefore filed I.A. No. 1297/2001, compromise petition, signed by all the parties to the suit and their respective advocates, praying that a final compromise decree may be passed accepting the compromise petition. The parties are prepared to pay requisite stamp duty for the preparation of compromise decree. The parties have also agreed to suffer their costs. Plans filed along with the compromise were agreed to form part of the decree. But the learned Munsiff, as per the impugned order dated 29.6.2001, dismissed the petition. The revision is aimed against the said dismissal.

(2.) Notice has been ordered to the respondents 1 to 3. Though respondents 1 and 3 had received the notice, they did not enter appearance. The second respondent could not be served as she left the place. After hearing the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and also considering the compromise petition filed by the parties, I do not find it necessary to hear the second respondent as she is one of the parties who signed the compromise petition expressing her desire to compromise the suit along with the other defendants and the plaintiff.

(3.) The order of the Court below is,