Edathala Grama Panchayath & Anr. v. T. S. Muraleedharan

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: A. Badarudeen, J.
Judgment Date: 2025-04-04
Court Decision / Holding: The regular first appeal is allowed in terms of the Memorandum of Settlement; the decree and judgment of the trial court are reversed; the Memorandum of Settlement shall form part of the first appellate decree; all interlocutory applications pending are dismissed; the registry is directed to refund the admissible court fee paid in this appeal to the appellant as per law.
Final Disposition: Appeal allowed; decree reversed; settlement recorded as part of decree; interlocutory applications dismissed; court fee refund ordered.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Edathala Grama Panchayath
Anr.

Respondents

T. S. Muraleedharan

Case Synopsis & Summary

Edathala Grama Panchayath & Anr. v. T.S. Muraleedharan, Regular First Appeal No. 527 of 2016, before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, delivered on 04 April 2025. The appeal challenges the decree and judgment dated 29 February 2016 in O.S. No. 462 of 2012 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, North Paravur, arising from a dispute regarding construction near a road widening/setback in Edathala village (Sy. No. 190/14; 3 cents in the 8 Schedule property). The parties, appellants and the respondent, jointly submitted a mediation agreement under Section 89 of the CPC read with Rules 24 & 25 of the ADR Rules, 2008; a Memorandum of Settlement dated 2 April 2025 was produced. The Mediator’s report states that the matter is settled and the terms include surrender of 0.5 meters of the respondent’s land for road widening on the north-eastern and eastern sides of the plaint A and B schedule properties, with the Panchayath to issue permissions on submission of a plan within one month. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the settlement, the MOA to form part of the appellate decree, and all interlocutory applications are dismissed; the registry is directed to refund admissible court fees to the appellant. The decision underscores the efficacy of ADR in appellate adjudication and records the negotiated settlement.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 96 of the CPC, 1908 (read with Order XLI Rule 1)Order XLI Rule 1, CPC, 1908Section 89 of the CPCCivil Procedure Code, 1908: ADR Rules, 2008 (Rules 24 & 25)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The appellants and the respondent collectively sought settlement through mediation under Section 89 CPC and the ADR Rules, 2008. They placed reliance on the Memorandum of Settlement prepared by the mediator and requested the High Court to record the settlement and dispose of the appeal accordingly. They asserted that the settlement resolves the dispute concerning road widening and setback issues on the subject properties and should be incorporated into the appellate decree, thereby avoiding further litigation.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondent supported the ADR process and the terms of the Memorandum of Settlement, including surrender of 0.5 meters of property for road widening and the grant of necessary permissions upon plan submission, and consented to withdraw the pending suit. Both parties urged the Court to record the settlement and terminate the proceedings in the interests of justice.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

REA NO. 52ZJO_F_2_0_16 2 025 : KER : 2 9 692 IN TEE HIGH COURT 0F REAltA HT ERN:AREldlM ## PRESENT ## THE HCINot7RABIE MR. 3OsTlcE A. BADHARrmEEli # 5RIEiA3r, TEE 4TE BA:I oF APRIL 2o25 / 14TH CHAITERAT 1947 REA NO. 527 0F 2016 ZUGAINST THE quDGMENIp miD DECH3EE DaiRED 29.o2.2ol6 rmi os No.462 oF 2ol2 oF PRIHclpEL SuB Jul)GEE,NOErTH BARAI7uR APPEIldENT/_ DEETFNDANTS = ## EDELTHALA GRzuaA PENCHA:xHm REPRESENTED By ITs sECRETAIr,EmTTHAIA NOFiTH.p.o,zqurmz+683564. THE sECRETARr EIIATHZ±IA GRZunA PENCHA:rzITh rEDAmALA NORTH.P.OrEL"AT683574. ## BX AVWS. SRI . T . s . HARlm)rmR SRI. RAAdESH s. suBRAlmaAIN. semi.G.sAbiTHosH KUMAR {p} , sc, EDHTHAIA GRAMA pENCHHrHm ## REspoavENI/plAINIIFF: T. s. MaRAIEEDnARzni s/O. LAIRE sANKARAli riAIR, PARA:Ill;REEFio ,IIOOsE IVO. x/245 A,N.A.D.p.o,hquTHIRAKZITTtmquRE,AL"z+683574. ## Br zxpw SRI.SZHITH rmaAR v. THIS REGULAR FIRET AIPEAL HA:WING BEEN FIHALLH REARD CIA 04.04.2025, TEE Cot7RT oN TEE SAME DHr DELlvERED TEE FOLI\oRT±NGs REA NO . _ _5 2_7_a_F_2_Q]iife 2025 : KER : 2 9 692 ## A. BADHARUDEEN, I ## RF.A. No. 527 of 2016 Dated 04th day of April, 2025 ## JUDGMENT This regular first appeal has been filed under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the decree and judgment dated 29.02.2016 in O.S. N9.. 462 9f 2012 9n the files 9f the Principal Sub JHdgr, Npr€h Paravur. 2. In this ~m.a#£f, pef€jss.rg_f?~r~r§d £g ,.in?d±~afig~r},. The p~ap€.i§§] viz, appellants and respondent have jointly signed mediation agreement submitted by the mediator, thereby matter has been settled and the memorandum of agreement under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure r/w Rules 24 & 25 of the Civil REA NO. 527 0F _2016_ 2 0 2 5 : KER : 2 9 6 92 Procedure (Alternative Dispute Resolution) Rules 2008 dated 22.04.2025, has been prodrced. The same appears to be legal and acceptable. 3, .I*n view Qf the settlement, the decree and judgment of the trial court stand reversed, and the appeal is allowed in terms of the settlement. The memorandum of settlement shall fo_rm part of the first appellate decree. 4. All interlocutory applications pending in this regular first appeal stand dismissed. Reststry is directed to refund the admissible court fee paid in this appeal to the appellant, as per law. Sd/- A. BADHARueEEN JUDGE EN ## EFtNAKLJLAM MEBIATIO.N CENTRE ## {HIGli CQUFLT HALL) Froin , ` , The Nodal, Officer, ` . High . Court Mediat,ion Centre. . The Registrar 8udic'ial}, I High Court Of Kerala; Emalenlam. **==> picture [56 x 15] intentionally omitted <==** **----- Start of picture text -----** REZZ,, **----- End of picture text -----** High Court of Kerala - ''ys_:i-._¢___.f±-± reg' . &o,.£. . \ Ref : `' Rod;rr3`f n .`. ' . ` . : . '` . ' ' .... ; . ./. . a . . ` ; 1 ..... I,. I • . I , *. , . I I , ' . . , _..,,...,.. '. '. dated ..¥ :9*.*, : \of the HonorableHigh Court Of Kerd.Ia /. ~1,1I11~1, I am to. forward herewith Report of the Mediator jn the matter along • with the eriEf osures for infQrma-tion and n?Ce5sary action. . / Yours Faithfully, `1' cer' ' Ernakulain Mediation centre / ( .,/ Encl:-1, Report Of .the Medfator* Settleme reement 2. Copy Of I.he`referrd! order dated d the High Court. Of Kerala, . 3. Copy Of the Petition .,.+ ', # BEFORE TIIE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA` AT EENAKULAn4 ## RFA No. 527 of 2016 > Edathala Grama Panchayath & Anr. Appellants T.S. Muraleedharan Respondent ## REPORT SUBNITTED BY THE MEDIATOR Mediated, matter is settled. Terms and conditions are attached herewith. Dated.this.the 2nd day of April, 2025. Adv. Zo Mediator IIigh Court Mediation Centre # BEFORE THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT EENAIULAM RFA No. 527 of 2016 Edathala Grama Panchayath & Anr. Appellants ## T. S. Muraleedharan Respondent REMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT UNDER SECTION 89 0F TIIE Col)E OF CIVIL PROCEDURE READ W-ITII RULES 24 & 25 0F THE CIVIL PROCEDURE (ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION),RULES, 2008: Pardes to the above disputes being the appellants 1 & 2 herein, namely the Edathala Grama Panchayath represented by its Secretary who is the defendant in O.S.No.462/2012 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, North Paravur and the respondent T.S.Muraleedharan being the sole respondent who is the p]`aintif I , they have resolved to setde the issue involved in the ..,` dispute on the following terms and conditions. 1.The parties agree that the respondenvplaintiff is the owner of 11.20 ares of property comprised in Sy.No.190/14 which is the plaint A Schedule property and 3 cents in the 8 schedule property with the same Sy.No. situated on Aluva East Vdiage Edathala, Aluva Taluk, Emakulam District. The dispute revolves around construction of a well without necessary set back. ->Ti::- ## Appeuants •t ''` `` ` `\,1.' EdathalaGrama panchayath,/J`!.,\ Rep. By its Seeretry **==> picture [240 x 91] intentionally omitted <==** **----- Start of picture text -----** .I.,,..:,`.. £` ``_- 1,; **----- End of picture text -----** 2. The secretary, EdathalaGrina i -t LAG` SE`r.IRf`=-Tr`„i``i,,,I iiiii=TiIERTI L=datjifa'1 Nor{,i P.C) , A,'uv, IE=d+i:;,{a~;€.G_r€;i,i;,\`;,:;\ Emll",,;Jm Djst p„ -(i. i=in=i;,a=ffai\ (2) 2.Parties also agree that the respondent/plaintiff submitted a proposal to the Panchayath on 22/11/2024 agreeing to surrender 0.5 meters of land as width from his property on the ea§tem and northern side of plaint 8 schedule property for the purpose of widening the existing 3 metres road to 3..5 m€tres through our the length on the nor(h eas( as i( passes through his property, in accordance with requirements Of the Panchayath. The same was discussed on the meeting of the Panchayath Committee dated 11/3/2025 and the same was approved. As such the respondent/plaintiff agrees to surrender 0.5 meters of his property framing out of the plaint 8 schedule property through the north -east Of the Plaint 8 schedule property. As such to parties on this agreeid resolution has derided to withdraw the pending suit proceedings involved in this appeal before this Hon'ble CourL 3.It is agreed by both parties that they have no further dispute or claim in this issue and the entire dispute involved being settled on the above terms, the respondent/plaintiff is at liberty to construct his compound wall leaving the agreed 0,5 mecer§ of width sunendered for road widening from the north to east Of the plaint a Schedule property . It is also agreed that the Panchayath will grant permissionINo Objection Certificate to the respondent/plaintiff on submitting a plan leaving the agreed 0.5 meters to enable the road width as 3.5 meters where it passes through the agreed portion Of the 8 schedule property within 1 month Of submitting an application by the respondent/plaintiff. == • AiA G,, : **==> picture [61 x 11] intentionally omitted <==** **----- Start of picture text -----** Respondent **----- End of picture text -----** i*\peuants :`L: I,,-Edathala Grama Panchayath, \ Rep. By its secretary The Secretary, Edathala Gramgip.an + ``= I T.S. Muraleetharan I.`1-.,-.I,`ii-::I,`` -,. ``nl;`' ) ,,,, ` •.,^;` A\u\`/:`, (. Q1 **==> picture [2 x 2] intentionally omitted <==** **----- Start of picture text -----** \ **----- End of picture text -----** **==> picture [20 x 3] intentionally omitted <==** **----- Start of picture text -----** Hu **----- End of picture text -----** 5ti,=F{Li`,1``,``. \ala Gra!T`:3 i-`,. , `, I `:_i Nor\`r` P.O , ;t`\'`j```c` , '\am D.ist. P.in : 683 { (3) Hence it is respectfully submitted that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to record this settlement agreement as part of this Hon'ble Court's Judgment in the above matter and dispose off the same in the interest of Justice. Dated this the 2nd day Of April, 2025. **==> picture [428 x 204] intentionally omitted <==** **----- Start of picture text -----** _ >--i.` 1AppelraTts Respondent -``.\ Ill J_ :L!\`t.,,,'i:,;:.`\r\E\quthalaGramapanchayath, c;ECP`Et.,,^,\`, \ , \ T.S. Muraleedharan .',`.I,c, ` -'` /,-.\ \ i.' : a [Grarr.`-1] A,`.V ` I '',,~\,,`,',:,:l`.,,I .i, _`~`,'L\._i::R\#. Ly its Secretryj 5Er,`._.. . ,..-I`j„ u\,amrl-,,st The Secretary, Ed`q\qala| Gra-rna •-I-,,,wh FCL,,-,,,,r,i-`J r.`, 8ZZZzZ, Edai\i\ciia 'i\``, .,` P.L` Ernaku\ai'`i, list. L\` I Counsel for the Appellants Counsel for the Respondent te-. \ qJ\ £ / a 8 \c|313\Lco6 **----- End of picture text -----** **==> picture [240 x 11] intentionally omitted <==** **----- Start of picture text -----** This settlement agreement is authenticated by me. **----- End of picture text -----** **==> picture [166 x 24] intentionally omitted <==** **----- Start of picture text -----** y BE!H Adv.Zohra Orediator **----- End of picture text -----**