This thin order dismisses an original side appeal and connected miscellaneous petitions as infructuous because the underlying suit had been compromised.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
CORAM :
The Hon'ble MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN O.S.A.No.148 of 2009
and M.P.Nos.1 of 2009 and 1 of 2011
M/s.Navaneethaam Traders a Partnership Firm, rep. By its Managing Partner, M.Ganesan. .. Appellant/Applicant/Plaintiff -vs1.Rosary Krishnamurthy 2.Lilly Prabhu 3.Elizabeth 4.Victoria Lakshmanan 5.P.Subramaniam .. Respondents/Respondents/Defendants Appeal filed under Order XXXVI Rule 9 of O.S. Rules and Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 22.12.2008 passed in Appl.No.2782 of 2008 in C.S.No.53 of 2004 on the original side of this Court.
J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was delivered by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The suit itself stands compromised and thus, the appeal has become infructuous, as stated by the learned counsel for the appellant.
2.Original Side Appeal, thus, stands dismissed as infructuous. Consequently, M.P.Nos.1 of 2009 and 1 of 2011 also stand dismissed.
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
To
The Sub Assistant Registrar, Original Side, Madras High Court, Chennai.
vgi(co) krd 19/9 O.S.A.No.148 of 2009
M/s. Navaneethaam Traders
Rosary Krishnamurthy
Lilly Prabhu
Elizabeth
Victoria Lakshmanan
P. Subramaniam
Sanjay Kishan Kaul
R. Mahadevan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
