Allowed

Mrs.Taarika Gnanesh v. Minor Rahul Vellanki

Madras HC24 Apr 2015CS/839/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court recorded a compromise memo in a partition suit involving minors, where the property was deemed incapable of physical division. The court approved the sale of the property and apportionment of proceeds among all parties, including minors' shares deposited by guardians.

What did the court decide?

Sale of the suit property and distribution of proceeds in equal shares to all parties; minor shares to be deposited by guardians.

Mrs.Taarika Gnanesh Vs Minor Rahul Vellanki — Partition | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED :: 24.04.2015

¶4

CORAM ::

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶6

C.S.No.839 of 2014

¶7

and

¶8

A.No.2998 of 2015 1. Taarika Gnanesh 2. Minor Miss Radhey Soundarya Gnanesh rep. by Mother and Guardian Mrs.Renuka Devi, W/o.P.Gnanesh, Old No.61, New No.119, Sir Thyagaraya Road, Pondy Bazaar, Thyagaraya Nagar, Chennai-17. ... Plaintiffs - Vs - 1. Minor Rahul Vellanki 2. Minor Arjun Vellanki Both minors represented by their guardian/mother Mrs.Lakshmi Prasanna, W/o.Ramakrishna Vellanki, J.54, Chaithanya Smaran, Kannamangala Post, Kodugodi, Bangalore-560 067.

¶9

3.Minor Vijayanagaram Vickram 4.Minor Vijayanagaram Aditya Both minors represented by their Guardian/MOther Mrs.Vishnupriya, W/o.Rajesh Vijayanagaram Lakshmipathy, Flat No.104, Fairmont Towers, No.16/2, Banaswadi Main Road, Next to ITC Info Tech, Cooke Town, Bangalore-560 005. ... Defendants

¶10

Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the O.S. Rules read

¶11

with Order VII Rule 1 of C.P.C. to pass a preliminary and final decree of partition dividing the 2/6^th share of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ plaintiffs 1 and 2 in the suit property mentioned in the

¶12

¶13

schedule by metes and bounds and to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the property and to prepare Sketch/Plan dividing the suit property mentioned in the schedule by metes and bounds and allot the 2/6^th share of the plaintiffs in the same.

¶14

For Plaintiffs :: Mr.R.Srinivas For Defendants 1 and 2 :: Mr.M.Prem Kumar For Defendants 3 and 4 :: Mr.A.Sakthivel

¶15

The application in A.No.2998 of 2015 is filed to record the compromise memo dated 19.02.2015 and to pass a preliminary

¶16

decree in terms of the above compromise memo.

¶17

It is seen that on 19.02.2015, the parties appeared along with their respective counsel before this Court and filed the said memo of compromise. Thereafter, the

¶18

Application Nos.2851, 2852 and 768 of 2015 were filed seeking

¶19

leave to the guardians of the respective minors to enter into

¶20

a compromise as stated in the Compromise Memo dated 19.02.2015. This Court allowed all the three applications on 20.04.2015. Accordingly, the present application is filed for recording compromise memo and pass a decree in the said suit in terms of the above said compromise.

¶21

The compromise memo dated 19.02.2015 filed by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ parties, signed by both of them as well as their respective

¶22

counsel reads as follows:

¶23

¶24

''1. The Applicants have filed this suit for partition and separate possession of their 2/6^th share in the suit property. The defendants 1 and 2 on the one hand and defendants 3 and 4 on the other own 2/6th share each (i.e) the remaining 4/6th share each in the suit property. Thus the entire suit property belongs to the plaintiffs 1 and 2 and the defendants 1 to 4.

¶25

The suit property comprises of a building which is very old. It requires a lot of repairs and maintenance. The building is occupied by number of tenants. They are all statutory tenants in possession for a long time. They are paying very meagre rent. The applicants 1 and 2 require funds urgently to settle their futures and careers. The respondents 1 to 4 are also in need of funds to pursue their education and careers.

¶26

enough rental income. The same is meagre. It is not possible to vacate the tenants at an early date. The parties do not have funds to repair the building or demolish and reconstruct it. None of them can afford to buy the shares of others. The suit property is incapable of division and enjoyment by metes and bounds.

¶27

Hence the guardians of the minors, plaintiff 2, and defendants 1 to 4 and the 1^st plaintiff have entered into the following compromise with the leave of this Hon'ble Court in respect of the minors.

¶28

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶29

The 1^st plaintiff, and the guardians of

¶30

¶31

the minor plaintiff No.2, defendants 1 and 2 and defendants 3 and 4 will invite offers and sell the building to the prospective purchaser who offers the best price for the building in as is where is condition and state.

¶32

The respective guardian of the minors, 2^nd plaintiff, and defendants 1 and 2, and 3 and 4 will execute the sale deeds in favour of the prospective purchaser/s on their behalf.

¶33

After defraying the expenses if any in bringing the property for sale the plaintiffs 1 and 2, defendants 1 and 2 and defendants 3 and 4, will appropriate equal 2/6^th share in the sale proceeds.

¶34

parties herein who are minors will be deposited by their respective guardians in fixed deposits or in immovable property purchased in the name of the minors and used for education, career, marriage, or purchase of assets in future for the respective minors.

¶35

The parties herein will bear their respective costs.

¶36

The parties pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass a preliminary decree on the above terms and thus render justice.''

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶38

¶39

Recording the above said compromise memo, the suit is decreed in terms of the above said compromise memo. The above said compromise memo shall form part of the record and decree. The connected Application is closed. No costs.

¶40

sd. K.R.C.B.J
24.04.2015
//Certified to be a true copy//
Dated this the day of 2015.
R.s/12.08.2015 COURT OFFICER
From 25.09.2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of
the Order/Judgment Decree in this format.

¶41

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Mrs.Taarika Gnanesh v. Minor Rahul Vellanki

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs.Taarika Gnanesh v. Minor Rahul Vellanki

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Mathiazhagan Vs P.J.Ethiraj and 2 Others

T.Ganesan Vs Ms/.Viprah Technologies

Hindustan Unilever Limited Vs Hindustan Soap Industries

Dr. Prosper Fernando Vs Mr D Joseph Jayaraman

Minor Nikhil Madhav Vs a.Srividya

Srinivas Fine Arts P Ltd. Vs R.R.Donnelley Publishers Ind