Dismissed

Kamalam v. S. Palanisamy

Madras HC14 Mar 2022AS/324/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras disposed of an Appeal Suit brought under Section 96 CPC against a District and Sessions Judge's decree. Based on a memo stating the dispute was settled and the appeal was not pressed, the court dismissed the appeal as not pressed and closed a connected petition.

What did the court decide?

The appeal suit is dismissed as not pressed. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

Kamalam Vs S. Palanisamy — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Date : 14.03.2022 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE TMT. JUSTICE S. KANNAMMAL A.S.No.324 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.6743 of 2016

¶3

1.Kamalam

¶4

2.Valliammal ...Appellants/Plaintiffs .Vs. 1. S. Palanisamy 2. Tmt. Jothilakshmi (died) 3. Banu Priya 4. Kruthika [R3 & R4 are Lrs of R2,impleaded as per order dt.23/02/2022 in CMP 1563/22] [R4 declared as Major as per order dt.23/02/2022 in CMP 1563/22) ...Respondents/Defendants

¶5

PRAYER: Appeal Suit is filed under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code to set aside the Judgment and Decree of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, made in O.S.No.3 of 2012 dated 26.10.2015.

¶6

For Appellants : Mr.V. Nicholas For Respondents : Mr.Ma.P. Thangavel

¶7

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

¶8

J U D G M E N T

¶9

This Appeal Suit has been filed against the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.3 of 2012 dated 26.10.2015 passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

¶10

In this Appeal Suit, the arguments of both side learned counsels were heard and the case was reserved on 28.02.2022 for pronouncing Judgment. At this stage the learned counsel for the Appellant filed a Memo before this Court on 07.03.2022 stating that the Appellants are not pressing the Appeal Suit. Hence, the appeal is ordred to be posted today under the caption “For Being Spoken To.”

¶11

Today when the matter came up for hearing, the learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that they have filed Memo for not pressing the First Appeal and the copy of the Memo was also served to the learned counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3. Hence the learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that the first Appeal may be dismissed as not pressed.

¶12

Heard the leanred counsel for the Appellants. In the Memo dated 07.03.2022 it is stated as follows:

¶13

“In the above appeal Judgement was reserved by the Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Kannammal. Now the Appellants have settled the disputes with the Respondents. Hence, they are not pressing the above First Appeal. Therefor they pray that the above First Appeal may be dismissed as not pressed.”

¶14

A copy of the aboove Memo also served to the learned counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3. The learned counsel for the Respondents has also made an endorsement for receipt of the Memo.

¶15

In such a view of the matter, the Appeal Suit is dismissed as not pressed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. As the Appellants have settled the disputes with the Respondents out of court and not pressed the appeal, the registry is directed to decide with regard to the return of court fee, as per rules.

¶16

Sd/-

¶17

Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶18

// True Copy //

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

ggs

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

¶24

The Correspondence Seat, Current Section, High Court of Madras.

¶25

Copy To

¶26

The Section Officer VR Section, High Court, Madras.

¶27

+1cc to Mr.V.Nicholas, Advocate, Sr.No.17333

¶28

A.S.No.324 of 2016

¶29

and C.M.P.No.6743 of 2016

¶30

GPL(CO) RN(29/03/2022)

¶31

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

Kamalam v. S. Palanisamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamalam v. S. Palanisamy

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

Mr.Ramasamy Vs Tmt.Palaniammal

P.R.Pandurangan Chettiar. Vs M.Balakrishnan

K.P.Palanisamy Vs P.Palaniyammal

Raama.Radhakrishnan Vs v.P.Radhakrishnan

Th Oriental Insurance Company Vs M/S Indian Bank

Malliga Vs M/S Ppg Enterprices Firm