In a suit for vacant possession, the parties settled via a joint compromise memo. The defendant handed over symbolic possession accepted by the plaintiff, who gave up the claim for monetary damages. The suit was decreed per the memo without costs.
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.01.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S.No.241 of 2006
Meston Education and Development Association (P) Ltd., a Private Limited Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act 1956, having registered office at New No.10 Old No.33, West Cott Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014, Rep.by its Secretary / Director ... Plaintiff Versus 1.M/s.R.M.H. Corporation Agencies, No.6, W.B.Road, Post Box No.303, Theppakulam, Trichy 620 002. A registered Partnership Firm, represented by its Managing Partner Mr.G.Srinivasan. 2.G.Srinivasan 3.S.Padmini 4.Master S.Lakshmi Narayanan 5.Master S.Vikram Defendants 4 and 5 are minors represented by their father and natural guardian 2nd defendant.
2
[Defendants 4 and 5 are declared as major as per the order in Application No.2715 of 2016 dated 17.06.2016 and the 3rd defendant is discharged from guardianship by the order in A.No.2716 of 2016 dated 17.06.2016.]
6.Church of South India Trust Association A Company incorporated under the India Companies Act, at No.5, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014 rep.by its Director.
7.Indian Bank, Clock Tower Branch, No.29, West Cott Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014, Rep.by its Branch Manager. ... Defendants
Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code praying to pass a judgment and decree:
a) directing the defendants 1 to 5 and defendant 7 to deliver vacant possession of the schedule mentioned property.
b) direct the defendants 1 to 5 jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.39,79,358/- to the plaintiff.
c) directing the defendants 1 to 5 jointly and severally to pay a sum of rs.40,000/- per month as damages for use and occupation of the property from the date of plaint till delivery of vacant possession of the plaint
3
schedule property by the defendants 1 to 5 plaintiff and the plaintiff under takes to pay the necessary Court fee there on when called upon to do so and
d) directing the defendants to pay the costs of the suit.
For Plaintiff : Mr.Devadason Sagar For Defendants : Mr.K.Kannan for D1 to D3 Mr.K.Muthramalingam for D7 Mr.Sunil Kumar for D4 and D5 J U D G M E N T
The suit is one for directing the defendants 1 to 5 and defendant 7
to deliver vacant possession of the schedule mentioned property, direct the defendants 1 to 5 jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.39,79,358/- to the plaintiff, directing the defendants 1 to 5 jointly and severally to pay a sum of rs.40,000/- per month as damages for use and occupation of the property from the date of plaint till delivery of vacant possession of the plaint schedule property by the defendants 1 to 5 plaintiff and the plaintiff under
takes to pay the necessary Court fee there on when called upon to do so and for costs of the suit.
compromise has been filed. As per the said compromise, the first defendant
4
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
dsa
had handed over symbolic possession of the suit property, since it is in occupation of the tenants. The same, is accepted by the plaintiff. The plaintiff also given up claim for damages.
C.S.No.241 of 2006
M/s.R.M.H. Corporation Agencies
R.SUBRAMANIAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
