Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Kerala · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7604 (KER)

UMMAR FAROOK, v. THAVALAKUZHIYAN SHEREEF,

RSA/754/2019 · 2025-03-20

M A Abdul Hakhim

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

RSA NO. 754 OF 2019 1 2025:KER:23861 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1946 RSA NO. 754 OF 2019 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.06.2019 IN AS NO.10 OF 2017 OF SUB COURT, MANJERI ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.10.2016 IN OS NO.19 OF 2012 OF MUNSIFF COURT, MANJERI APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS NOS.1 & 2/DEFENDANTS 2 & 4 (SUPPLIMENTARY): 1. UMMAR FAROOK, AGED 37 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMEDKUTTY, METHANTHODI HOUSE, ANAPPAMKUNNU, MANJERI AMSOM DESOM, MANJERI P.O., ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 2. MARIYAKKUTTY, AGED 46 YEARS, W/O. SHOUKATH, D/.O MUHAMMEDKUTTY, KAPPUNGAL HOUSE, CHEMMANIYOD P.O., UCHARAKADAU, MELATTUR, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT BY ADV K.RAKESH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF & DEFENDANTS: 1 THAVALAKUZHIYAN SHEREEF, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. BEERAN HAJI, THRIPPANACHI AMSOM, MUTHANNUR DESOM, THRIPPANACHI P.O.,ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY MUKTHIYAR AGENT ABDUL SALAM, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O. HASSAN URNIKULAVAN HOUSE, KUZHIMANNA AMSOM, DESOM AND POST, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-673 641 RSA NO. 754 OF 2019 2 2025:KER:23861 2 SAKEER HUSSAIN, AGED 44 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMEDKUTTY, METHANTHODI HOUSE, ANAPPAMKUNNU, MANJERI AMSOM DESOM, MANJERI P.O, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-676 121 3 ABDUL LATHEEF, AGED 42 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMEDKUTTY, METHANTHODI HOUSE, ANAPPAMKUNNU, MANJERI AMSOM DESOM, MANJERI P.O, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-676 121 R1 BY ADV P.VENUGOPAL THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: RSA NO. 754 OF 2019 3 2025:KER:23861 JUDGMENT 1. The learned counsel for the appellants filed a memo dated 12.03.2025 to the effect that the Appeal is not pressed. 2. Heard. Memo recorded. 3. Accordingly, the R.S.A. is dismissed as not pressed. Sd/- M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM JUDGE Shg/