Dismissed

Ansar (Died) v. Selvam Dhanapal

Madras HC24 Mar 2021SA(MD)/879/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses the second appeal in SA(MD)No.879/2009 and disposes of SA(MD)No.880/2009. The court upheld the lower court decrees based on a settlement where the plaintiff received compensation for the respondents' occupation of the property.

What did the court decide?

The second appeal in SA(MD)No.879/2009 is dismissed with no costs. The second appeal in SA(MD)No.880/2009 is disposed of in terms of the settlement.

Ansar (Died) Vs Selvam Dhanapal — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

SA(MD).No.879 of 2009 and SA(MD).No.880 of 2009

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Fourth day of March Two Thousand and Twenty One PRESENT

¶3

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice N.SATHISH KUMAR SA(MD).No.879 of 2009 and SA(MD).No.880 of 2009

¶4

1 . Ansar (Died)

¶5

... Appellant / 1 Respondent / 2 Defendant in SA(MD)879/2009 ... Appellant / Appellant / 2 Defendant in SA(MD)880/2009

¶6

2 . S.Faizunnisha Ansar

¶7

A.Nilofer Anisha

¶8

A.Navid Ibrahim

¶9

... Appellants 2 to 4 in SA(MD)No 879 & 880/2009)

¶10

(Appellants 2 to 4 are brought on record a Lrs of the deceased sole appellant vide court order dated 24.01.2020 made in C.M.P.(MD) Nos. 7267, 8797, 8800 & 8802 of 2019 in SA(MD)No 878 to 880/2009)

¶11

-Vs-

¶12

1.Selvam Dhanapal ... 1 Respondent / Appellant /Plaintiff in SA(MD)879/2009 ... 1 Respondent / 1 Respondent / Plaintiff in SA(MD)880/2009

¶13

2 . A.Mallika

¶14

... 3 Respondent / 3 Respondent / 4 Defendant in SA(MD)879/2009 ... 3 Respondent / 4 Respondent / 4 Defendant in SA(MD)880/2009

¶15

Common Prayer:- Second Appeals filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli made in A.S.Nos.321 of 2005 and 305 of 2005 dated 26.02.2008 confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.1152 of 1987, dated 26.07.2005 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli.

¶16

COMMON DECREE:- These Second Appeals coming on for hearing on this date, upon perusing the grounds of Appeal, the judgments and decrees of the Lower Appellate Court and the Court of First Instance and the material papers in the Suit and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.A.Arumugam, Advocate for M/s. Ajmal Associates, appearing for the Appellants in S.A(MD) 879 and 880/2009 and of Mr.T.S.R. Venkatramana for Mr.P.Edin Brough, Advocate for the First Respondent and of Mr.A.Nawazkhan, Advocate for the Respondents 2 and 3 in both https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

1/3

¶18

SA(MD).No.879 of 2009 and SA(MD).No.880 of 2009

¶19

appeals and in pursuance of the submission made by the parties who had already arrived at a settlement that the plaintiff in O.S.No.3001 of 2004, who is the owner of the property, has received a sum of Rs.22,00,000/-(Rupees, Twenty two lakhs only) as compensation from the First Defendant for (*)her occupation and improvements made in the plaintiff's property in full quit, while this Court disposing of the appeal in S.A(MD)880/2009, in terms of settlement doth order and decree as follows,

¶20

(1) That, the judgment and decree of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli, made in A.S.Nos.305 of 2005 dated 26.02.2008 and the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.1152 of 1987, dated 26.07.2005 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli be and hereby are confirmed and the Second Appeal in S.A(MD)No.879/2009 shall stand dismissed;

¶21

(2) that there be no costs in this Appeal.

¶22

			Description of Property
In	Trichy D	istr	ict, Trichy Taluk, K.Sathanur Pudur Village,
Ayan Pun	ja.
Survey
No.8/1	1.57	/	y; 40 mo mfyKs;s bghJthd 2 ePh; nuhLf;F
No.8/2	1.57	/	tlf;F. Vk;.mg;Jy; $g;ghh; 21 ePh; kidf;F fpHf;F.
No.8/3	3.25	/	nf.jhh;nt; bkha;jPd; ,th; 19 ePh; kidf;F bjw;F.
No.8/4	2.92	/	tp.vk;.o.eapdhK`kj; uht[j;jh; 23 ePh; kidf;F nkw;F
No.8/5	1.43	/	,e;j ehd;bfy;iyf;Fs;gl;l bjd;tly;$hjpao fpHf;fpYk;
No.8/6	1.53 ------	/	nkw;fpYk; 100 fpHnky; $hjpao bjw;fpYk; tlf;fpYk; ½ 71 f;F 7186 rJuo cs;s g[Q;ir fhypkid ePh;.22y; ½
Total	12.27 ------		,jd; fPH;gFjpapy; fpHnky; 100 mo bjd;tly; 36 ½ mo Mff; TLjy; 3668 rJuo. ½ ¼

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

Assistant Registrar(CS-II) 16.04.2021

¶25

(*) Corrected as per order dated 29.07.2021

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(CS-II)

¶28

// True Copy //

¶29

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶30

¶31

(*) to be substituted the order already despatched on 15.06.2021

¶32

The Principal Subordinate Judge , Tiruchirapalli

¶33

The Principal District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli.

¶34

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

¶35

2/3

¶36

SA(MD).No.879 of 2009 and SA(MD).No.880 of 2009

¶37

Copy to:

¶38

The Section Officer, V.R. Section,

¶39

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 2 Copies

¶40

+1 CC to M/s.AJMAL ASSOCIATES, Advocate in SR-13215/2021 +4 CC to M/s.P.EDIN BROUGH, Advocate in SR Nos.13379 to 13382/2021

¶41

ORDER DATED : 24/03/2021

¶42

========================== DECREE ==========================

¶43

SA(MD). No.879 and 880 of 2009

¶44

Nature of Decree:- Dismissing of the Second Appeal in SA (MD). No.879 of 2009 and Disposing of the Second Appeal SA(MD). No.880 of 2009 preferred against the judgment and decree of the Principal Subordinate Judge , Tiruchirapalli made in A.S.Nos.321 of 2005 and 305 of 2005 dated 26.02.2008 confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.1152 of 1987, dated 26.07.2005 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli. etc., as stated within.

¶45

TR(10.06.2021) 3P 10C KB(19.08.2021) 3P 10C

¶46

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

¶47

3/3

Ansar (Died) v. Selvam Dhanapal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ansar (Died) v. Selvam Dhanapal

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

P.Sikkandar, Vs D.Baskara Pandiyan

S.Sivan Vs The Inspector of Police

M/S.Ajay Auto Electricals, Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Sterlite Industries (India) Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Sekar.N Vs The Principal Chief Conservator of

Manimaran.P Vs the Inspector General of Registration