Partly allowed

A.Saraswathi v. K.Palanisamy(Deceased)

Madras HC8 Oct 2018SA/337/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court partly allowed the second appeal in a partition suit. Upon an amicable resolution between the appellant and certain respondents to divide the suit property via a compromise memo, the higher decree was set aside, the trial court judgment restored, and the agreed land allotments recorded.

What did the court decide?

The decree of the V Additional District Court set aside; trial court judgment restored based on compromise; compromise memo recorded as part of the decree reflecting land allotments.

A.Saraswathi Vs K.Palanisamy(Deceased) — Partition | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08.10.2018 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH S.A.No.337 of 2014

¶2

A.Saraswathi ... Appellant Vs.

¶3

1.K.Palanisamy (Deceased) 2.P.Krishnaraj 3.P.Thangaraj 4.A.Meenambigai 5.N.A.Kandasamy 6.K.Srinivasan 7.A.Alok Arora 8.R.Vijayalakshmi 9.R.C.Prasad 10.R.D.Thilaka 11.M.Chandrasekar 12.P.Vasu Padmanabhan 13.A.Narayanan 14.H.Sunitha Hariganesh 15.M.Santhosh Mathew

¶4

16.The Branch Manages, Indian Overseas Bank, Ramalinga Nagar, Saibaba Colony, Coimbatore

¶5

17.Gandhimathi ... Respondents

¶6

Prayer: Second Appeals filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against judgment and decree dated 05.09.2013 passed by the learned V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore in A.S.No.89 of 2012, reversing the judgment and decree dated 12.07.2012, passed by the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore in O.S.No.647 of 2010.

¶7

For Appellant : Mr.T.S.Baskaran

¶8

For Respondents: Mr.K.S.Karthik Raja, for R1 to R5 and R17 No Appearance for R6 to R16

¶9

J U D G M E N T

¶10

The plaintiff is the appellant in the present second appeal. During the pendency of second appeal, the appellant and respondents 2 to 4 and 17 had amicably resolved the dispute among themselves and entered into a joint memo of compromise, whereby these parties had divided the portion of the suit property among themselves. As per the terms of the compromise, the appellant has been allotted an extent of 3.51 acres in Survey No.238 part and the respondents 2 to 4 and 17 have been allotted the rest of the extent of 5.26 acres. The terms of joint memo of compromise are extracted

¶11

here under:-

¶12

b) The decree and judgement of the V Additional District Court in A.S.No.89 of 2012 dated 05.09.2018 may be set aside and the decree and judgement of the Trial Court viz. the First Additional Sub Court, Coimbatore, dated 12.07.2012 in O.S.No.647 of 2010 may be restored. c) By way of amicable compromise, the parties have divided the properties and they have enclosed a sketch duly signed by the parties. The Plaintiff/Appellant has been allotted an extent of 3.51 acres in Survey No.238 part which is shown in green colour in the plan appended to this compromise petition and she has already been put in possession of the propery.

¶13

d) The Respondents 2 to 4 /Defendants 2 to 4 and 17th respondent (Legal Heirs of deceased 1st respondent/1st defendant) have been allotted the rest of the extent measuring 5.26 acres of land consisting of the following extent in the following survey fields:

¶14

i) Survey No.239/1 part - 3.29 acres ii) Survey No.239/4 full - 0.02 acres iii) Survey No.241/1 part - 0.57 acres iv) Survery No.240/2 part � 0.61 acres v) Survey No.244/1B1 - 0.77 acres

Total 5.26 acres

2.The above terms of the joint memo of compromise is hereby recorded. It is also brought to the notice of this Court, the properties which have been settled between the appellant and the respondents 2 to 4 and 17 are portion of the suit properties and that the remaining extent have already been alienated to other defendants who had remained ex-parte. It is also the submissions of both the counsels that the appellant and respondents 2 to 4 and 17 are not making any claim towards the rest of the suit properties in joint memo of compromise.

¶19

3.In the light of the submissions made by recording the terms of joint memo of compromise extracted above, the second appeal is partly allowed in terms of the joint memo of compromise extracted above.

¶20

4.The memo of compromise shall also form part of the decree.

¶21

08.10.2018

¶22

¶23

Speaking/Non Speaking Order

¶24

Index:yes/no

¶25

Internet:yes

¶26

Note: The Registry shall dispatch joint memo of compromise to the trial Court for the purpose of endorsing the final decree.

¶27

¶28

The V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

¶29

The I Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore.

M.S.RAMESH, J.

S.A.No.337 of 2014

08.10.2018

A.Saraswathi v. K.Palanisamy(Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Saraswathi v. K.Palanisamy(Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Megharaj Fathima Gani, Vs Mr.Anthony Stalin

Paravathamma@Parvathi, Vs Mr. Saravanan

B.v.Suresh Kumar Vs J. Rajiv Prince Aroun

Ms Preetha Prasad Vs Mrs. Nazeera Afzal Rahman

S. Kapaleeswaran Vs Sri Vedantha Desikar Deves

J.Raja Jacob Vs E.Velu