This court adjourned two civil second appeals postoned to February 8, 2018, with the earlier interim stay order extended until that date. No substantive decision or reasoning is provided in this order.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )
Friday, the Second day of February Two Thousand Eighteen
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.S.SUNDAR
CMP(MD) No.10031 of 2017 IN SA(MD)Nos.473 and SA(MD)No.474 of 2017
CMP(MD) No.10031 of 2017 IN SA(MD)Nos.473 :-
1 MUNIYANDI(DIED)
(APPELLANTS 2 TO 8 BROUGHT ON RECORD
AS LRS OF DECEASED SOLE APPELLANT
VIDE ORDER DATED 28.04.2016 MADE
IN MP(MD)NOS.4 TO 6/2015 IN
SA(MD)SR.NO.19595/2010 BY RMDJ) ... PETITIONERS/ APPELLANTS
Vs
(RESPONDENTS 2 TO 6 HEREIN BROUGHT ON
RECORD AS LRS OF DECEASED SOLE RESPONDENT (KRISHNAVENI) VIDE ORDER DATED 28.04.2016 MADE IN MP.NO.1/2011 IN SA.SR.19595/2010 BY RMDJ)
9 MINOR MANISHA
... RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS
(MINOR RESPONDENTS 8 & 9 REPRESENTED THROUGH THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN 7th RESPONDENT)
(RESPONDENTS 7 TO 9 HEREIN BROUGH ON RECORD AS LRS OF DECEASED 4TH RESPONDENT (GANESAN)VIDE ORDER DATED 28.04.2016 MADE IN MP.NOS.1 TO 3/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ IN SA.SR.19595/2010)
2
(R3,5,6 & 7 ARE REP.BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY VASANTHI)
(RR3,5,6 & 7 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY, VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 22.08.2017 IN CMP(MD)NO.7255 & 7256/2017 IN SA.SR.19595/2010
& 19596/2010 BY PSNJ)
PRAYER IN CMP(MD) No.10031 of 2017 IN SA(MD)Nos.473 :-
Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to stay all further proceeding in AS.No.93/2006 on the file of the Sub Court, Sivagangai in OS.No.42/2000 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Sivagangai pending disposal of the main second appeal.
SA(MD)474 of 2017:-
(APPELLANTS 2 TO 8 BROUGHT ON RECORD AS Lrs OF DECEASED SOLE APPELLANT VIDE
ORDER DATED 28.04.2016 MADE IN MP.NOS.4 to 6
OF 2015 IN SA(MD)SR.NO.19595/2010 .... APPELLANTS/LRS OF
APPELLANT / DEFENDANT
VS.
RECORD AS LRS OF DECEASED SOLE RESPONDENT (KRISHNAVENI) VIDE ORDER DATED 28.04.2016 MADE IN MP.NO.1/2011 IN SA.SR.19595/2010 BY RMDJ)
... RESPONDENTS 7 TO9 / LRS 4th RESPONDENTS
3
(RESPONDENTS 7 TO 9 HEREIN BROUGH ON RECORD AS LRS OF DECEASED 4TH RESPONDENT (GANESAN)VIDE ORDER DATED 28.04.2016 MADE IN MP.NOS.1 TO 3/2015 IN SA.SR.19595/2010,19596/10)
(R3,5,6 & 7 ARE REP.BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY VASANTHI)
(RR3,5,6 & 7 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY, VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 22.08.2017 IN CMP(MD)NO.7255 & 7256/2017 IN SA.SR.19595/2010 & 19596/10 BY PSNJ)
PRAYER IN SA(MD)No.474/17:-
to prefer the Memorandum of grounds of Second Appeal filed against the judgment and decree passed in AS.No.112 of 2006 on the file of the Sub-Court, Sivagangai dated 14.08.2007 confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.42 of 2000 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Sivagangai, dated 05.09.2005.
ORDER : These petitions coming on for orders upon perusing the petitions and the affidavits filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.R.SUNDAR SRINIVASAN, Advocate for the petitioners in both the petitions, Mr.S.SRINIVASARAGHAVAN, Advocate on behalf of the Respondents,2,3,5,6,7 in both the cases, and the court made the following order:-
Post the matter on 08.02.2018. Interim order granted earlier is extended till then. sd/02/02/2018 / TRUE COPY /
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)
TO
+1 CC TO Mr. R.SUNDAR SRINIVASAN , Advocate, Sr.No. 1829 CMR/GSP JAM/06/02/2018/PM-PN/ SAR 1 / 3P-4C ORDER IN
CMP(MD) No.10031 of 2017 IN SA(MD)Nos.473 and SA(MD)No.474 of 2017
Date :02/02/2018
Muniyandi (died) & Others
Krishnaveni (died) & Others
S.S.SUNDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
