Allowed

J Manimegalai v. R Paneerselvam and Another

Madras HC4 Jun 2018CS/396/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a partition suit where the plaintiff sought declaration of shares and injunction. The parties filed a memo of compromise detailing the allotment of specific suit properties to each defendant and the plaintiff. The Court accepted the compromise and decreed the suit accordingly, making the terms part of the final decree.

What did the court decide?

The suit is decreed in terms of the memo of compromise dated 25.04.2018, allotting specific properties to the respondents as per the schedule.

J Manimegalai Vs R Paneerselvam and Another — Partition | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 04.06.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

¶6

C.S.No.396 of 2012
J.Manimegalai ...Plainiff
Vs.
1.R.Paneerselvam
2.P.Malliga ...Defendants
Plaint filed under Orcer IV Rule I of Original Side Rules r/w Order

¶7

VII Rule I and Order XXIV Rule I of the Civil Procedure Code.

¶8

For Plaintiff : Mr.C.Samadharmarasu

¶9

For Respondents : Mr.V.Sekar for D1 Mr.V.Raghavachari for D2

¶10

J U D G M E N T

¶11

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SUBBIAH,J.)

¶12

The suit was filed by the plaintiff for the following reliefs:

¶13

a) For directing the defendants 1 and 2 to effect partition and allot 1/3^rd share in the schedule mentioned

¶14

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶15

¶16

suit properties by metes and bounds to the plaintiff herein.

¶17

b) For a permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 and 2 their men, agents, subordinates, nominee or nominees etc., from alienating or encumbering the properties more particularly described in the schedule

¶18

of the plaint.

¶19

c) Directing the defendants to pay the cost of the

¶20

suit.

¶21

Today, a memo of compromise, entered into between the

¶22

plaintiff and the defendants dated 25.04.2018, is filed before this Court, signed by both the parties as well as their respective counsels. The terms of above said memo of compromise reads as follows:

¶23

schedule of properties shall be allotted to the shares of the 1^st defendant viz., R.PANNEERSELVAM in the

¶24

above suit.

¶25

That the first item in the suit schedule of

¶26

properties shall be allotted jointly to the share of the

¶27

plaintiff and the 2^nd defendant viz.,

¶28

Mrs.J.MANIMEGALAI & Mrs.P.MALLIGA, respectively.

¶29

That the 1^st defendant shall take possession

¶30

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶31

¶32

of the 2^nd and 3^rd items in the suit scheduled properties.

¶33

That the plaintiff and the 2^nd defendant shall take possession of the 1^st items in the suit scheduled properties forthwith. That the amount deposited in

¶34

the account of C.S.No.396/12 shall take by the plaintiff Mrs.J.Manimegalai and he 2^nd defendant Mrs.P.Malligai and 1^st defendant has no objection for withdrawal by his sisters namely Mrs.J.Manimegalai and Mrs.P.Malliga.

¶35

That the parties to the suit, their assigners and their legal heirs shall have no right to lay any claim against each other except to the shares that is allotted to their share in the above terms of compromise. The parties agree for quashing of proceedings in Crime No.448/17 on the file of CCB.

¶36

That the parties to the suit have agreed for passing the final decree in terms of the above compromise.

¶37

That the contents of the above compromise may be made as part and parcel of final decree.

¶38

That the parties to the suit shall bear the

¶39

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶40

¶41

cost on their own.”

¶42

Learned counsels appearing for the respective parties seek for decreeing the suit in terms of the above said memo of compromise. Both the parties are also present before this Court.

¶43

Considering the above stated facts and circumstances, the suit is decreed in terms of the above said memo of compromise which shall form part of the record as well as the decree. No costs. [R.P.S.,J.] [P.D.A.,J.] 04.06.2018 vsi Speaking order / Non Speaking order Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes / No

¶44

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶45

¶46

R.SUBBIAH,J. AND P.D.AUDIKESAVALU,J.

¶47

Vsi

¶48

C.S.No.396 of 2012
04.06.2018

¶49

http://www.judis.nic.in

J Manimegalai v. R Paneerselvam and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J Manimegalai v. R Paneerselvam and Another

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

Sree Santhi Varshini Pet Vs The Tamil Nadu Pollution

Christ King Middle School Vs the Union of India

Dhanasekar Vs Bhagyalakshmi(died)*

Ponnammal, W/o Kasi Vs The Chairman

R.Paneerselvam Vs Mrs. Manimegalai

M/S. National Insurance Vs Sridevi