Disposed

Chellappappa v. Jeyakumar

Madras HC4 Oct 2019CRP(MD)/1354/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench disposed of a civil revision petition under Article 226 after accepting a compromise memo dated 18.09.2019 filed by the petitioner and respondents 1 and 2, who admitted the petitioner's title and possession, leading to the withdrawal of a criminal complaint and closing of investigation. The case has been amicably settled via mediation.

What did the court decide?

The civil revision petition is disposed of in view of the compromise memo accepted by the court.

Chellappappa Vs Jeyakumar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

C.R.P(MD)No.1354 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 04.10.2019

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

C.R.P(MD)No.1354 of 2019

¶7

Chellappappa

¶8

...Petitioner / Petitioner / Petitioner

Vs.

1.Jeyakumar

2.RenugaDevi

3.M/s.EVP and Leeladevi, Agro Tech PVT Ltd., Represented to its Director Tmt.Leeladevi

¶13

4.Purushothamdas Gupta

¶14

5.Guruvareddiar @ Raju Reddiar

Ramasamy (died)

6.Udhaya Suriyan

7.Jeyachandran

8.Jeyaprakash

9.Singarammal

10.Padmavathy

11.Bhuvaneshwari

12.Gopinath ... Respondents / Respondents/ Respondents

¶23

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order dated 12.04.2019 made in E.P.No.24 of 2019 in O.S.No.58 of 2010 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Aruppukkottai.

¶24

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

¶25

1/6

¶26

C.R.P(MD)No.1354 of 2019

¶27

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Aravinthan For R1 and R2 : Mr.K.Sivabalan

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order, dated 12.04.2019 made in E.P.No.24 of 2019 in O.S.No.58 of 2010 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Aruppukkottai.

¶30

2.When the matter came up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties before the mediation. Both the parties have also filed a memo of compromise, dated 18.09.2019, which was signed by the petitioner as well the respondents 1 and 2 and also by their respective counsel. The terms of the compromise memo entered into between the parties, dated 18.09.2019 is incorporated hereunder :

¶31

“a)The petitioner is giving up the above civil revision petition as against the respondents 3 to 12 and they are only formal parties in the above original suit as well as above civil revision petition. The only contesting parties in the above civil revision petition are the respondents 1 and 2.

¶32

b) Now the respondents 1 and 2 are ready and willing to abide by the decree and judgment dated 04.10.2017 passed in O.S.No.58 of 2010 by the Subordinate Judge, Arupukottai and agreed not to file any application to restore the appeal suit in A.S.No.70 of 2017 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Virudhunagar.

¶33

c)The respondents 1 and 2 have handed over possession of the properties which forms part of the above civil revision petition to the petitioner and admits the title of the petitioner in respect of the properties involved in the above civil revision petition and also as well as forms part of the decree and judgment dated 04.10.2017 passed in O.S.No.58 of 2010 by the Subordinate Judge, Arupukottai.

¶34

d)The respondents 1 and 2, while admitting the title and possession of the entire suit schedule properties with the petitioner, also will not disturb with the possession and also will never claim title of the petitioner or her successors in future also.

¶35

e)Since the respondents 1 and 2 admits the title of the petitioner, the petitioner agrees to withdraw the criminal Complaint in Crime No.37 of 2011 lodged by her before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti-Land Grabbing Special Cell, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar District.

¶36

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

¶37

2/6

¶38

C.R.P(MD)No.1354 of 2019

¶39

f)The petitioner also does not have any objection to close the investigation in respect of the above complaint.

¶40

g)In so far as it related tot he construction of common wall in the first schedule of the property, the petitioner agrees to construct the same. The respondents 1 and 2 have no objection for the construction of the said common wall.”

¶41

3.This court has accepted the compromise memo, dated 18.09.2019, filed by both the parties and duly signed by their respective counsel and the same is recorded.

¶42

4.In view of the compromise memo dated 18.09.2019 signed by both the parties and their respective counsel, which forms part and parcel of this Order, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶45

// True Copy //

¶46

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶47

rj2

¶48

ENCL.: XEROX COPY OF MEDIATION REPORT AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT To

¶49

1.The Subordinate Judge, Aruppukkottai.

¶50

+1CC TO MR.G.ARAVINTHAN, Advocate Sr. No.91518 +1CC TO MR.K.SIVABALAN, Advocate Sr. No. 91517

¶51

Order made in C.R.P(MD)No.1354 of 2019 04.10.2019

¶52

MR (CO)

¶53

TR(18.11.2019)3P 4C

¶54

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

¶55

3/6

Chellappappa v. Jeyakumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chellappappa v. Jeyakumar

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

J.R.Gopinath, Vs S.Kandasamy

Alagumuthu Vs Ayyappan

The Branch Manager Vs Muthammal

Chellappan, Vs Ponnumony

Mariappan Vs Kasthuri

Mohandhas Vs Aruldhas