Allowed

N.Annakkili v. 1.DAKSHINAMURTHY

Madras HC19 Apr 2021AS/783/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed two first appeals filed under Section 96 CPC based on a joint memo of compromise. The appellant agreed to pay Rs.1,50,00,000 for property rights, which was fully paid. The respondents accepted the appellant's title and exclusive possession, thereby agreeing to set aside the earlier trial court decrees.

What did the court decide?

The appeals are decreed based on the Joint Memo of Compromise dated 09.04.2021. The decree passes in terms of the compromise, the joint memo forms part of the decree, and no costs are awarded.

N.Annakkili Vs 1.DAKSHINAMURTHY — Partition | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 19.04.2021

¶3

C O R A M

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶5

A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001 and C.M.P.Nos.5955, 5982 &5986 of 2019

¶6

A.S.No.783 of 2001 N.Annakkili ... Appellant/Plaintiff Vs 1. Dakshinamurthy 2. Durai 3.Vasuki (Died) 4.Arivazhi 5.Valluvan 6.Banu 7.Karthikeyan 8.Kavitha 9.S.Tamilselvi 10.S.Sathish Kumar ..Respondents/Defendants (R9 & R10 are brought on record as L/R's of the deceased R3 vide order of this Court dated 20.12.2007 made in C.M.P.Nos. 14 to 16/2007)

¶7

(R7 & R8 declared as major vide order of Court dated 20.12.2007 made in C.M.P.No.39/2007 and their guardian Banu revoked from guardianship vide order of Court dated 20.12.2007 made in C.M.P.No.39 of 2007)

¶8

Prayer : First Appeal filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code against the Decree and Judgment dated 24.07.1997 made in O.S.No.3907/89 on the file of the VI Additional Judge/City Civil Court, Chennai.

¶9

For Appellant ..Mr.M.V.Venkataseshan For Respondents ..Mr.R.Prabakar (R2,R6, R7 to 10) No appearance (R4 & R5)

¶10

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

¶11

A.S.No.1017 of 2001

¶12

Annakili

¶13

... Appellant/Defendant

¶14

Vs 1.Dakshinamurthy 2.Durai 3.Vasuki (Died) 4.M.Banu 5.Karthikeyan 6.Kavitha 7.S.Tamilselvi

¶15

8.S.Sathish Kumar

¶16

..Respondents/Plaintiffs

¶17

(R7 & R8 are brought on record as L/R's of the deceased R3 vide order of this Court dated 20.12.2007 made in C.M.P.Nos. 11 to 13/2007)

¶18

(R5 & R6 declared as major and their guardian Banu revoked from guardianship vide order of Court dated 20.12.2007 made in C.M.P.No.40 of 2007)

¶19

Prayer : First Appeal filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code against the Decree and Judgment dated 24.07.1997 made in O.S.No.7373/88 on the file of the VI Additional Judge/City Civil Court, Chennai.

¶20

For Appellant .. Mr.M.V.Venkataseshan For Respondents .. Mr.R.Prabakar (R2,R4 to 8)

¶21

When these matters are taken up for hearing, Mr.R.Prabhakar the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2,6 to 10 in A.S.No.783 of 2001 filed a Memo dated 02.07.2015 stating that the first respondent namely Dakshinamurthy passed away on 19.11.2008 leaving behind his legal heirs viz., 1.Durai, 2. Banu, 3. Mani, 4. M.Karthikeyan, 4. Kavitha, 5.S.Tamilselvi and S.Sathikumar, who are already on record as Respondents 2,6 to 10 in the above appeal. The said Memo is recorded.

¶22

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

¶23

Further, Mr.R.Prabhakar the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2, 6 to 8 in A.S.No.1017 of 2001 filed a Memo dated 02.07.2015 stating that the first respondent namely Dakshinamurthy passed away on 19.11.2008 leaving behind his legal heirs viz., 1.Durai, 2. Banu, 3. Mani, 4. M.Karthikeyan, 4. Kavitha, 5.S.Tamilselvi, and S.Sathikumar, who are already on record as Respondents 2,6 to 8 in the above appeal. The said Memo is recorded.

¶24

3. The learned counsel appearing on either side submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties and a Memo of compromise dated 09.04.2021 has been filed to that effect, which reads as under: "1.The appellant filed O.S.No.3907 of 1998 on the file of 6th Additional City Civil Court for partition. But appellant was in possession of that portion so the respondents filed O.S.No.7373 of 1988 for recovery of possession of the very same property. Both suits were tried together. The suit filed by the appellant was dismissed and the suit filed by the respondent was decreed. So the appellant filed A.S.No.783 of 2001 and A.S.No.1017 of 2001 on the file of this Court.

¶25

2.Pending appeal the matter was referred to mediation. In the mediation the appellant accepted to pay Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lakhs only) to the respondents as per their demand and the respondents further accepts the title of the appellant/defendant in O.S.No.7373 of 1988 and accepts the exclusive the possession of the appellant.

¶26

3. Accordingly a sum of Rs.1,15,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifteen Lakhs only) has already been paid by the appellant, when the matter was listed before his Lordship Mr.Justice S.Sunder. At that time appellant offered to pay balance sum of Rs.35,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lakhs only) towards balance sum on or before 30.04.2021. To prove his bonafide the

¶27

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

¶28

appellant paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/(Rupees Ten Lakhs only) by way of two Demand Drafts on 17.12.2020. Now the appellant is paying final sum of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) By way of two DD's Bearing No.949182 dated 01.02.2021 for Rs.2,50,000/- and another D.D. bearing No.949047 dated 12.01.2021 for Rs.22,50,000/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) drawn on State Bank of India, Ashok Nagar Branch.

¶29

4.The respondent accepts that appellant has paid entire sale consideration as demanded by them. Hence the respondents has no objection for allowing both the appeals and setting aside the decrees of the trial Court. The respondents further undertakes to close the E.P. pending before the executing Court. The respondents further submit that they have no objection for receiving the original title document marked as Ex.A1 to A5 by the appellant before this Court.

¶30

Therefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to record this Memo and pass the decree in favour of the appellant and thus render justice."

¶31

Recording the said Memo of Compromise dated 09.04.2021 these appeals are decreed in terms of Joint Memo of Compromise. The Joint Memo of Compromise shall form part of the decree. No costs.

¶32

// True Copy //

¶33

arr

¶34

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

¶35

¶36

The VI Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.

¶37

+2cc to Mr.N.Manoharan, Advocate SR.No.23747, 23748 +6cc to Mr.M.V.Venkataseshan, Advocate SR.No.24213, 24214

¶38

A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001

¶39

PPA(CO) CB(12/01/2022) CB(31/01/2022)

¶40

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

N.Annakkili v. 1.DAKSHINAMURTHY

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Annakkili v. 1.DAKSHINAMURTHY

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

The Managing Director Vs M. Devarajan

The Managing Director, Tnstc., Kumbakonam Vs Kannattai

The Managing Director Vs K.Logendiran

The Managing Director Vs Shanthi

The Special Tahsildar Vs Pushpavathi Bai

The Special Tahsildar Vs Parvathibai