Premalatha v. Maheen and others

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN`** ``` TUESDAY, THE 20[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 FAO (RO) NO. 20 OF 2022 ``` ``` AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.3.2022 IN AS. NO.15/2019 OF SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD AND JUDGMENT DATED 31.10.2018 IN OS 648/2008 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF’S COURT,NEDUMANGAD ``` ## **`APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:`** ``` PREMALATHA, AGED 61 YEARS, D/O. DEVAKI, RESIDING AT V.V. BHAVAN, POOCHEDIVILA, KATTAKADA, POONJAMCODE MURI, KATTAKADA P.O, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, KATTAKADA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695572. BY ADVS. G.P.SHINOD GOVIND PADMANAABHAN AJIT G ANJARLEKAR ATUL MATHEWS ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS & RESPONDENTS 3 TO 6 AND 8 TO 18/ DEFENDANTS`** ## **`7,8 AND DEFENDANTS 2 TO 5 & 9 TO 14:`** ``` 1MAHEEN, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O.HASANARU PILLAI, RAJEENA HOUSE, KUTTICHAL, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695541. 2REJEENA, AGED 37 YEARS, D/O. RAMLA BEEVI, RAJEENA HOUSE, KUTTICHAL, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695541. 3SIVAPRASAD, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. SELVAM, PUTHENKADA VEEDU, ODANKUZHY, ORAH - 199, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695006. 4GANESH, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O. ARUMUGHAM, PUTHENKADA VEEDU, ODANKUZHY, ORAH - 199, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695006. 5VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. ARUMUGHAM, PUTHENKADA VEEDU, ODANKUZHY, ORAH - 199, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695006. ``` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` ``` 2 ``` - `6 PADMAKUMAR, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. ARUMUGHAM, PUTHENKADA VEEDU, ODANKUZHY, ORAH - 199, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695006.` - `7 CHANDRIKA, AGED 66 YEARS, W/O. SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695542.` - `8 VINOD CHITHU, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695542` - `9 RESMEENDRA, AGED 42 YEARS, D/O.CHANDRIKA, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695542.` - `10 SUPRABHA, AGED 40 YEARS, D/O.CHANDRIKA, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695542` - `11 SUHURTH RAJ, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI,MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695542.` - `12 UDAYAKUMAR, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, DWARAKA, PARUTHIPPALLY, PARUTHIPPALLY.P.O, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695542` - `13 DIVITHLAL, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE FROM KUNNILVILAKATHU VEEDU, POONJAKKOTTU MURI, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695572.` - `14 SUJA, AGED 42 YEARS, D/O.UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE FROM KUNNILVILAKATHU VEEDU, POONJAKKOTTU MURI, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695572.` - `15 SUBHA, AGED 52 YEARS, D/O. UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE FROM KUNNILVILAKATHU VEEDU, POONJAKKOTTU MURI, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` ``` 3 ``` ``` 695572. 16AMBILI AGED 47 YEARS, D/O. UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE FROM KUNNILVILAKATHU VEEDU, POONJAKKOTTU MURI, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695572. 17REJITHA AGED 44 YEARS, D/O. UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE FROM KUNNILVILAKATHU VEEDU, POONJAKKOTTU MURI, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695572. BY ADVS. G.S.REGHUNATH : FOR R1 & R2 MEENA.A. : FOR R7 TO R11 JITHIN SAJI ISAAC : FOR R12 K.J.SAJI ISAAC(S-82) : FOR R12 ELIZABETH VARKEY(E-25) : FOR R12 AJEESH EMMANUEL(K/109/2012) : FOR R12 SHAMSUDEEN O.K.(K/000687/2017): FOR R12 T.KRISHNANUNNI (SR.) : FOR R7 TO R11 VINOD RAVINDRANATH : FOR R7 TO R11 K.C.KIRAN : FOR R7 TO R11 M.R.MINI : FOR R7 TO R11 M.DEVESH : FOR R7 TO R11 ASHWIN SATHYANATH : FOR R7 TO R11 ANISH ANTONY ANATHAZHATH : FOR R7 TO R11 THAREEQ ANVER K. : FOR R7 TO R11 ``` ``` THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER - REMAND ORDER HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 20.12.2022, ALONG WITH FAO (RO).22/2022, 25/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` ``` 4 ``` ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 20[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 FAO (RO) NO. 22 OF 2022 ``` ``` AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.3.2022 IN AS NO.18/2019 OF SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD AND JUDGMENT DATED 31.10.2018 IN OS 648/2008 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT,NEDUMANGAD ``` ## **`APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:`** ``` PREMALATHA, AGED 61 YEARS, D/O. DEVAKI, RESIDING AT V.V.BHAVAN, POOCHEDIVILA, KATTAKADA, POONJAMCODE MURI, KATTAKADA P.O, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, KATTAKADA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695572. BY ADVS. G.P.SHINOD GOVIND PADMANAABHAN AJIT G ANJARLEKAR ATUL MATHEWS ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS & RESPONDENTS 3 TO 6 AND 8 TO 15/`** ``` ADDL.DEFENDANTS 9 TO 13 AND DEFENDANTS 2 TO 5,7,8 & ADDL. 14TH DENFENDANTS AND COUNTER CLAIM DEFENDANTS 15-19: ``` ``` 1CHANDRIKA, AGED 69 YEARS, W/O.SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPALLY, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695542. ``` - `2 VINOD CHITHU, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPALLY, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695542 .` ``` 3RESMEENDRA, AGED 45 YEARS, ``` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` ``` 5 ``` - `D/O.SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695542.` - `4 SUPRABHA, AGED 41 YEARS, D/O.SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695542` - `5 SUHURTH RAJ, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695542` - `6 SIVAPRASAD, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. SELVAN, PUTHENKADA, ODANKUZHI, ORAH-199, THIRUMALA, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHPUARAM695006.` - `7 GANESH, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. ARUMUGHAM, PUTHENKADA, ODANKUZHI, ORAH-199, THIRUMALA, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHPUARAM695006.` - `8 VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.ARUMUGHAM, PUTHENKADA, ODANKUZHI, ORAH-199, THIRUMALA, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHPUARAM695006.` - `9 PADMAKUMAR, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.ARUMUGHAM, PUTHENKADA, ODANKUZHI, ORAH-199, THIRUMALA, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHPUARAM695006.` - `10 MAHEEN, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O.HASANARU PILLA, RAJEENA SADANAM, KUTTICHAL, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695541.` - `11 RAJEENA, AGED 37 YEARS, D/O.MAHEEN, RAJEENA SADANAM, KUTTICHAL, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695541.` - `12 UDAYAKUMAR, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, NAYANANANDANAM, THIRUMANKUZHI, PAZHAYATHERUV MURI, ARYANAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695542.` - `13 DIVITHLAL, AGED 45 YEARS,` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` ``` 6 ``` ``` S/O.UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695572. 14SUJA, AGED 57 YEARS, D/O.UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695572. 15SUBHA, AGED 55 YEARS D/O.UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695572. 16AMBILI, AGED 53 YEARS, D/O.UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695572. 17RAJITHA, AGED 50 YEARS, D/O.UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695572. ``` ``` THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER - REMAND ORDER HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 20.12.2022, ALONG WITH FAO (RO).20/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` ``` 7 ``` ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN`** ``` TUESDAY, THE 20[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 FAO (RO) NO. 25 OF 2022 ``` ``` AGAINST THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 23.3.2022 IN AS 15/2019 OF SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD AND JUDGMENT DATED 31.10.2018 IN OS 648/2008 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, NEDUMANGAD ``` ## **`APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS 7& 8:`** ``` 1MAHEEN, AGED 63 YEARS, HASANARU PILLAI, RAJEENA HOUSE, KUTTICHAL, MANNORKARA VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 541. 2RAJEENA, AGED 38 YEARS, D/O RAMLA BEEVI, RAJEENA HOUSE, KUTTICHAL, MANNORKARA VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 541. BY ADV G.S.RAGHUNATH ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF & DEFENDANTS & COUNTER CLAIM DEFENDANTS:`** ``` 1PREMALATHA, AGED 62 YEARS, D/O DEVAKI, RESIDING AT V.V.BHAVAN, POOCHEDIVILA, KATTAKADA, POONJAMCODE MURI, KATTAKADA P.O., PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, KATTAKADA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 572. (ORIGINAL PLAINTIFF/COUNTER CLAIM 1[ST] DEFENDANT). 2SELVAM, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O ARUMUGHAM, PUTHENKADA VEEDU, ODANKUZHY, ORAH-199, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 3SIVAPRASAD, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O SELVAM, PUTHENKADA VEEDU, ODANKUZHY, ORAH-199, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 4GANESH, AGED 42 YEARS, ``` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` ``` 8 ``` - `S/O ARUMUGHAM, PUTHENKADA VEEDU, ODANKUZHY, ORAH-199, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.` - `5 VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O ARUMUGHAM, PUTHENKADA VEEDU, ODANKUZHY, ORAH-199, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.` - `6 PADMAKUMAR, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O ARUMUGHAM, PUTHENKADA VEEDU, ODANKUZHY, ORAH-199, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.` - `7 UDAYAMMA, AGED 78 YEARS, D/O DEVAKI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, PULIMOODU, ARYANAD, UZHAMALACKAL VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 542.` - `8 CHANDRIKA, AGED 67 YEARS, W/O SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 574.` - `9 VINOD CHITHU, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 574.` - `10 RESMEENDRA, AGED 43 YEARS, D/O CHANDRIKA, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 574.` - `11 SUPRABHA, AGED 41 YEARS, D/O CHANDRIKA, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 574.` - `12 SUHURTH RAJ, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O SADASIVAN, VINOD BHAVAN, PARUTHIPPALLI, KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 574.` - `13 UDAYAKUMAR, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O GOPALAKRISHNAN, DWARAKA, PARUTHIPPALLI, PARUTHIPPALLY P.O., KOKKUDI MURI, MANNOORKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 574.` - `14 DIVITHLAL, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE FROM KUNNILVILAKATHU VEEDU, POONJAKKOTTU MURI, PERUMKULAM` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` ``` 9 ``` ||`VILLAGE, KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 572.`| |---|---| |`15`|`SUJA,`| ||`AGED 43 YEARS,`| ||`D/O UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU,`| ||`CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE FROM`| ||`KUNNILVILAKATHU VEEDU, POONJAKKOTTU MURI, PERUMKULAM`| ||`VILLAGE, KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 572.`| |`16`|`SUBHA,`| ||`AGED 53 YEARS,`| ||`D/O UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU,`| ||`CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE FROM`| ||`KUNNILVILAKATHU VEEDU, POONJAKKOTTU MURI, PERUMKULAM`| ||`VILLAGE, KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 572.`| |`17`|`AMBILI,`| ||`AGED 48 YEARS,`| ||`D/O UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU,`| ||`CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE FROM`| ||`KUNNILVILAKATHU VEEDU, POONJAKKOTTU MURI, PERUMKULAM`| ||`VILLAGE, KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 572.`| |`18`|`REJITHA,`| ||`AGED 45 YEARS,`| ||`D/O UDAYAMMA, MUTHUVANDANKUZHI, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU,`| ||`CHITTUVEETTU MURI, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE FROM`| ||`KUNNILVILAKATHU VEEDU, POONJAKKOTTU MURI, PERUMKULAM`| ||`VILLAGE, KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 572.`| |`THIS`|`FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER - REMAND ORDER HAVING COME UP`| |`FOR HEARING ON 20.12.2022, ALONG WITH FAO (RO).20/2022 AND`|| |`CONNECTED `|`CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE`| |`FOLLOWING:`|| ``` 10 ``` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` ## **`JUDGMENT`** ``` The respondents in FAO(RO)20/2022 and FAO(RO) ``` ``` 22/2022 are the very same persons and services completed as against them in FAO(RO)20/2022. Respondent Numbers 6 to 9 in FAO(RO)No.22/2022 are the parties to the other appeal FAO (RO)No.20/2022 ``` ``` and their service was completed and hence service is declared as complete. Heard both sides. Both ``` ``` appeals are against the common order of remand by ``` ``` the First Appellate court. The remand was ordered on the ground of non-compliance with the requirement under Section 68 of the Evidence Act, ``` ``` in proof of a Will. In fact, the due execution of the Will is not under challenge. Necessarily, the ``` ``` question of proof doesn't arise for consideration. ``` ``` It is well settled that an admitted document need not be proved. It is submitted across the Bar that, the first appellate court may be directed to ``` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` **==> picture [14 x 7] intentionally omitted <==** ``` consider all the questions pertaining to the dispute involved in the suit and also to address all issues raised therein and issues if any, omitted to be raised at the trial stage. The impugned order of remand will stand set aside. The parties shall appear before the first appellate court on 23/01/2023 so as to enable the first appellant court to proceed further in the matter and the first appellate court is hereby directed to dispose of the appeal on merits in consonance with the mandate under Order 41 Rule 23, 23A, and 24 of CPC and also the legal position laid down by this Court inGopalakrishnan and Another v. Ponnappan and others [2021 (5) KHC 548]followed by the ``` ``` decision of Apex court in Bhairab Chandra Nandan v. Ranadhir Chandra Dutta (1988 KHC 883). Both the appeals hence will stand allowed accordingly. In view of the abovesaid disposal, the learned counsel for the appellant in FAO (RO) 25/2022 Sri. G S ``` ``` FAO (RO) Nos.20/2022, 22/2022 & 25/2022 ``` ``` 12 ``` ``` Raghunath fairly conceded that it is not at all ``` ``` necessary to proceed further in the matter. Hence, submission is recorded. FAO (RO)25/2022 will stand dismissed as not pressed into service. ``` ## **`Sd/-`** ``` P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE ``` ``` rkr-20/12 ```