Dismissed

Prabakaran, v. Sebastian

Madras HC18 Dec 2020SA(MD)/773/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of the Second Appeal as the parties settled their differences and executed a compromise. The Court decreed the specific allotment of land in T.S. No. 49 and 61 between the Appellants and the 1st Respondent as per the agreed terms.

What did the court decide?

Decree was passed allotting 50 cents in T.S. No. 49 and 7 cents + 40 cents in T.S. No. 61 to Appellants and 7 cents in T.S. No. 49 to 1st Respondent, with no further claim by either party.

Prabakaran, Vs Sebastian — Partition | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

¶2

Friday, the Eighteenth day of December Two Thousand and Twenty

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.GOVINDARAJ

¶5

SA(MD) No.773 of 2014

¶6

PRABAKARAN

¶7

ELANGO : Appellants/Respondents 1 & 2/Plaintiffs

¶8

/ VERSUS /

¶9

1 SEBASTIAN, S/O.(LATE) PACKIYAM, SHENGABANUR, KODAIKANAL, POST & TALUK, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

¶10

: 1^st Respondent/Appellant/1^st Defendant

¶11

The District Collector, Dindigul Collectorate, Dindigul Post, Dindigul Taluk.

¶12

The District Revenue Officer, Dindigul Collectorate, Dindigul Post, Dindigul Taluk.

¶13

K.P.A.PUELA

¶14

K.P.A.SHANTHI

¶15

FLORANCE

¶16

K.P.A. RAJA

¶17

M.LAKSHMANAN

¶18

(Respondents 4 to 8 ex parte in the lower Court. Hence, notice may be dispensed with)

¶19

: Respondents 2 to 8/Respondents 3 to 9 /

¶20

Defendants 2 to 8

¶21

Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, preferred against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No. 3 of 2014 on the file of the Sub Court, Vedasandur, dated 28.08.2014 which was reversed in the judgment and decree passed in O.S.185 of 1999 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Kodaikanal, dated 06.07.2009

¶22

DECREE: This Second Appeal coming on for hearing on this day in the presence of MR.C.VAKEESWARAN, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT and MR.A.HARIHARAN, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENTS having settled their differences and entered into a compromise between themselves and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ through their respective counsels and having filed the memo of compromise duly signed by the parties as well as their Advocates and

¶23

upon perusing the grounds of Appeal and the judgments and decrees of the Appellate Court and the Court of First Instance and the records relating to the case and the memo of compromise, this Court while disposing the Second Appeal and by recording the said Memo of Compromise the Original which is annexed herewith doth order and decree as follows:-

¶24

(1) That,the Appellants and the 1^st Respondent be and hereby are agreed that the Property in T.S.No.49 to an extent of 50 cents out of 57 cents which is allotted to the 1^st Respondent herein, namely, Sebastian and the remaining 7 cents in T.S.No.49 and 40 cents in T.S.No.61 are allotted to the Appellants in the Second Appeal No.772/2014 namely Prabakaran and Rama Prabakaran;

¶25

(2) that, the Appellants and the 1^st Respondent be and hereby are agreed to act upon and there is no further claim by either of the parties; and

¶26

mapl;lk; 1:- jpz;Lf;fy; hPb, nfhilf;fhdy; rg;b, nfhilf;fhdy; lTd;, thu;L b gpshf;“ ” vz;. 24 b.v];.epu;. 49f;F tp];j;uzk; 0.23.00, tlf;F: ,UjaGuk; Kdprpgy; NuhL, njw;F: Nfhuf;G+u; NuhL> fpof;F: b.v];.epu;. 48> Nkw;F b.v];.epu;. 50.

¶27

mapl;lk; 2:- jpz;Lf;fy; hPb, nfhilf;fhdy; rg;b, nfhilf;fhdy; lTd;, thu;L b gpshf;“ ” vz;. 24 b.v];.epu;. 61f;F tp];j;uzk; 0.16.00 Vu;Rf;F ehd;F khy;. tlf;F: Nfhuf;G+u; GJ NuhL> njw;F: b.v];.vz;.60> fpof;F: b.v];.epu;. 62> Nkw;F: b.v];.vz;.60> Mf nkhj;jk; 0.39.00 Vu;Rf;F 0.97 nrd;l; ,lk; kl;Lk;.

¶28

// True Copy //

¶29

¶30

The Sub Judge, Vedasandur.

¶31

The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Kodaikanal.

¶32

Copy to: The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.(2)

¶33

+1CC to Mr.C.VAKEESWARAN, Advocate, SR.Nos.26562. +2CCS to Mr.A.HARIHARAN, Advocate, SR.Nos.26798 & 26799. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶34

ORDER DATED : 18/12/2020

¶35

DECREE

¶36

SA(MD)No.773 of 2014

¶37

Nature of Decree :- Disposing the Second Appeal in terms of memo of compromise preferred against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No. 3 of 2014 on the file of the Sub Court, Vedasandur, dated 28.08.2014 which was reversed in the judgment and decree passed in O.S.185 of 1995 on the file of the District Munsifcum-Judicial Magistrate, Kodaikanal, dated 06.07.2009 and etc. as stated within.

¶38

SGS(CO) CS(25.01.2021) 3P 8C

¶39

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

Prabakaran, v. Sebastian

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabakaran, v. Sebastian

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

Subbarayan(Died) Vs Ganesan

Srirengam Club, Vs Municipal Council

The Special Tahsildar (L.a) Vs Subramani

Prabakaran, Vs Sebastian

A.Rathinasabapathy(Died) Vs the Special Tahsildar

The Revenue Divisional Officer Vs M.S.A. Ibrahim (Died)