On a second appeal, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of the matter based on a joint compromise memo filed by the parties, forming it part of the decree.
Appeal disposed of based on the terms of the joint compromise memo dated 13.11.2018.
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
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 15.04.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
S.A.No.584 of 2013 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2013
Kajamydeen ...Appellant/Appellant/1st Defendant
Vs.
1.Mohammed Kasim through his power agent Samsudeen ...1st respondent/1st respondent/ Plaintiff
...Respondents 2 to 4/ Respondents 2 to 4/Defendants 2 to 4
Prayer:- Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the Judgment and Decree dated 15.03.2013 made in A.S.No.79 of 2012 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Dindigul, confirming the Judgment and decree, dated 26.07.2012 in O.S.No.22 of 2008 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Natham.
For Appellant : Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar
For R-1 : Mr.A.Hariharan For R-2 to R-4 : Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah Additional Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
Heard Mr.H.Laxmi Sankar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr.A.Hariharan, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 2 to 4.
2.It is represented that the matter has been compromised https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ between the parties and now they are filing a joint compromise memo, dated 13.11.2018. The appellant and the first respondent are present before this Court with their respective counsel.
2
3.In the light of the above fact that the matter was compromised between the parties, this Second Appeal is disposed of on the terms of the compromise memo. The compromise memo, dated 13.11.2018 shall form part of the decree.
4.It seems that while allowing the application to receive the additional documents, this Court, in C.M.P.(MD)No.11188 of 2016, has called for a report with regard to the signature of the plaintiff in the power of attorney. Since the appeal itself is disposed of, on the terms of joint compromise memo, no further adjudication is necessary pursuant to the order passed in the above CMP dated 29.11.2016. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CS-III)
// True Copy //
Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
rj2
To
1.The Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul.
2.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Natham.
3.The Village Administrative Officer, Nadumandalam Village, Natham Village, Dindigul District.
4.The Tahsildar, Natham Taluk, Dindigul District.
5.The District Collector, Dindiguil District, Dindigul.
COPY TO
The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. (2 copies)
+1CC TO MR.A.HARIHARAN, Advocate Sr. No.81106 +1CC TO MR.H.LAKSHMI SHANKAR, Advocate Sr. No. 61196
S.A.No.584 of 2013 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2013 15.04.2019
KMK(CO) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ TR (02.05.2019) 4P 10C
Kajamydeen
Mohammed Kasim
K. Kalyanasundaram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
