Allowed

M/S Parthas v. Mrs R.Dhanalakshmi

Madras HC1 Feb 2017OSA/400/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellants filed an appeal to make an interim injunction absolute, record the discharge of a mortgage, direct the bank to deposit title documents, and treat the paid sum as part of the sale consideration. The appeal was disposed of by agreement in these terms.

What did the court decide?

Made interim injunction absolute; recorded discharge of mortgage; directed deposit of title documents; treated Rs. 15 lakhs as part of sale consideration.

M/S Parthas Vs Mrs R.Dhanalakshmi — Company and Corporate | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 01.02.2017

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The Hon'ble MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶7

O.S.A. No.400 of 2012

¶8

M/s.Parthas,
Rep. By its Managing Partner,
S.Nagarajulu. .. Appellant
-vs-
1.R.Dhanalakshmi
2.R.Anantha Kumar
3.R.Veeresh Kumar
4.Standard Chartered Bank
Haddows Road, Chennai – 6.
5.Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. By its Manager and POA,
Mr.K.Velmurugan.
(Impleaded as R-5 vide order dt.
01.02.2017 in CMP.1552/2017) .. Respondents

¶9

Appeal filed under Order XXXVI Rule 9 of O.S. Rules read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 25.06.2012 passed in O.A.No.688 of 2006 in C.S.No.659 of 2006 on the file of original side of this Court.

¶10

O.A.No.688 of 2006.

¶11

Original Application praying that this Court be pleased to grand an order of interim injunction restraining the respondent, its men, servants, agents assigns, or any are claiming through of under them form in any manner alinating or enumering the schedule maintained propertier, pending disposed of this suit.

¶12

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

¶13

For Appellant : Mr.Madhan Babu For Respondents : Mr.P.Arivudai Nambi for RR 1 to 3 : Mr.V.Jayachandran for RR 4 and 5 for M/s.V.Jayachandran Asso.

¶14

J U D G M E N T

¶15

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶16

The Assignee of the fourth respondent has been formally impleaded as the fifth respondent today.

¶17

2.In so far as the discharge of the mortgage created is concerned, the appellant/plaintiff is stated to have discharged the same vide Demand Draft dated 27.01.2017 for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs only) in favour of the fifth respondent.

¶18

3.In view of the aforesaid, orders are sought in the appeal in the following terms:

¶19

a) Making absolute the order of interim injunction granted in O.A.No.688 of 2006 in C.S.No.659 of 2006;

¶20

b) Recording the discharge of mortgage created in favour of the 4^th respondent / 4^th defendant bank in respect of Plaint Schedule item nos.3 and 4 by payment of Rs.15 lakhs by the appellant/plaintiff, and that the 4^th respondent/4^th defendant bank and/or its assignee shall not have any further claim over Plaint Schedule item nos.3 and 4;

¶21

c) Directing the 4^th respondent / 4^th defendant bank and/or its assignee viz., ''Phoenix ARC'' to deposit the entire title and other documents pertaining to Plaint Schedule item no.3 and 4 and the mortgage created in respect thereof with the Registrar General of this Hon'ble Court for safe custody and subject to the outcome of C.S.No.659 of 2006;

¶22

d) Treating the said sum of Rs.15 Lakhs as part and parcel of the sale consideration payable by the

¶23

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

¶24

appellant/plaintiff under the agreement for sale dated 02.04.2005 and supplementary agreement dated 30.06.2005 and granting liberty to the appellant/plaintiff and respondents/defendants 1 to 3 to agitate their respective rights as mentioned in the impugned order dated 25.06.2012.

¶25

4.The appeal, by agreement, is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

¶26

5.We are informed that the defendants have not even filed the written statement for ten years. List on 13.02.2017 before the learned Single Judge on the undefended Board.

¶27

sd/
Assistant Registrar(CO)
/true copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
sra
To
The Sub Assistant Registrar,
Original Side, Madras High Court,
Chennai.
+1cc to Mr.P.Arivudai Nambi, Advocate Sr.No.6170.
+1cc to Mr.Satish Parasaran, Advocate Sr.No.6654.
O.S.A.No.400 of 2012
NM(CO)
GN(10/02/2017)

¶28

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

M/S Parthas v. Mrs R.Dhanalakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Parthas v. Mrs R.Dhanalakshmi

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

S. Vaidyanathan, Vs The District Collector

M/S.Om Cargo Services Vs Southern Railway

B.J.Wilson Vs the Member Secretary

The Organization of Muslim Vs State of Tamilnadu

M/S Goyal Gases Priveate Vs M/S Sbq Steels Limited

Rangarajan Narasimhan, Vs The Director