Case Summary
M/s Skyline Builders filed a suit against Peter and others regarding a dispute, which has been resolved through a joint compromise petition. The court found the terms lawful and recorded the compromise.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Refund of court fee as per Section 69 of Kerala Court Fee and Suit Valuation Act
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The case was resolved through a joint compromise between the parties, which the court decreed as lawful and accordingly recorded. The court granted a refund of court fees as per the applicable act.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found the terms of the compromise lawful and satisfactory to all parties involved.
The court found the terms of the compromise lawful and satisfactory to all parties involved.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found the terms of the compromise lawful and satisfactory to all parties involved.
The court found the terms of the compromise lawful and satisfactory to all parties involved.
Supporting Evidence
Satisfied that whole subject matter of suit is satisfied and matter settled between the parties.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence suit is decreed as per terms of compromise. Counter claim is decreed as per terms of agreement.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- M/s Skyline Builders
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Peter
- Party Age
- 87
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Peter Antony
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Joseph Xavier
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- George Peter
- Party Age
- 53
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Teresa Augustine
- Party Age
- 61
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Balagopalan A
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Rajagopalan A
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sojo J Kallidukkil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M N Manmadan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Shyama A S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- B N Shivashankar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Tinu T Joseph
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Suit is decreed as per terms of compromise.
Evidence:
Hence suit is decreed as per terms of compromise.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Counter claim is decreed as per terms of agreement.
Evidence:
Counter claim is decreed as per terms of agreement.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Parties are entitled to refund of court fee as per Section 69 of Kerala Court Fee and Suit Valuation Act.
Evidence:
Parties are entitled to refund of court fee as per Section 69 of Kerala Court Fee and Suit Valuation Act.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between M/s Skyline Builders vs Peter et al regarding compromise settlement.
Case Code Year
Case between M/s Skyline Builders vs Peter et al regarding compromise settlement.
Case Flags
Out-of-Court Settlement