Munusamy v. Kumari
Case brief
What is this about?
In the second appeal regarding title to suit properties, the single judge dismissed the appeal as infructuous after the respondent executed a sale deed transferring her half share to the appellants.
What did the court decide?
The second appeal was dismissed and the underlying suit stood dismissed as infructuous.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.10.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
S.A.No. 77 of 2014
1.Munusamy 2.Sekar 3.Murthi 4.Elumalai ..Appellants/Respondents/Defendant Vs. Kumari ..Respondent/Appellant/2nd Respondent Prayer: Memorandum of Second Appeal filed under Section. 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree dated 09.07.2013 in A.S.No.36 of 2012 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Gingee reversing the judgment and decree dated 28.06.2012 in O.S.No. 96 of 2003 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif, Gingee.
For Appellants : Mr. R.Sunil Kumar For Respondent : Mr. T.Dhanasekaran J U D G M E N T
This Second Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 09.07.2013 in A.S.No.36 of 2012 on the file of Sub-Ordinate Judge, Gingee reversing the judgment and decree dated 28.06.2012 in O.S.No. 96 of 2003 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif, Gingee.
- The learned counsel appearing for the appellants has produced a sale deed dated 29.07.2015 in and by which the respondent had sold the property to the appellants 2, 3 and 4, who are the sons of the first appellant. She has also executed a document titled as Sammadha Pathiram, wherein she had agreed to withdraw the suit.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the second appeal lies in the facts as the suit became infructuous due to a subsequent sale deed.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Munusamy
- respondent
Kumari
Coram
R. Subramaniam
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court