Disposed

C.Udaya Bhanu v. P.K.Ramalingam Ayyappa

Madras HC20 Dec 2022AS/859/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an appeal filed under Section 96 of the CPC. The parties filed a Memo of Compromise settling the dispute. The court recorded the settlement, upheld the withdrawal of the appeal, and ordered the refund of court fees to the appellant.

What did the court decide?

the appeal suit is disposed of in terms of the Memo of Compromise; court fee refunded to the Appellant.

C.Udaya Bhanu Vs P.K.Ramalingam Ayyappa — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

AS.No.859 of 2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 20.12.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN

¶8

AS.No.859 of 2014 MP.No.1 of 2014

C.Udaya Bhanu

Appellant

P.K.Ramalingam Ayyappa Respondent

¶13

Prayer:- This Appeal Suit has been filed, under Section 96 of CPC, against the judgement and decree, dated, 22.07.2011, passed in OS.No.9997 of 2010, by the Additional District Court (FTC No.I), Chennai.

¶14

For Appellant : Mr.C.Rajan

¶15

For Respondent : Mr.P.Sankaranarayanan

¶16

JUDGEMENT

¶17

(Judgement of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.)

¶18

The Defendant in OS.No.9997 of 2010, on the file of the Additional District

¶19

Court (FTC No.I), Chennai, is the Appellant in the above appeal.

¶20

The Respondent herein, as Plaintiff, filed the above suit for recovery of a sum

¶21

of Rs.14,47,328.30/- with interest 18% p.a. from the date of the plaint till the

¶22

1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

AS.No.859 of 2014

¶24

date of payment. However, the suit was decreed by the Trial Court, holding that the Plaintiff is entitled to a sum of Rs.11,02,911.30/- with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of plaint till the date of realisation. Aggrieved by the judgement and decree of the Trial Court, the above appeal is filed.

¶25

During the pendency of the appeal, the Respondent herein filed an execution petition in EP.No.4411 of 2012 in OS.No.9997 of 2010, for recovery of the sum. Now, it is reported before this Court that the Appellant and the Respondent have settled the issue out of Court and to that effect, the parties have filed a Memo of Compromise, dated 20.12.2022, signed by them as well as their respective counsel appearing before this Court. The learned counsel on either side has stated that the said Memo of Compromise was signed by the respective parties in their presence.

¶26

The terms of the said Memo of Compromise, dated 20.12.2022, read as

¶27

follows:-

¶28

“3. The Appellant guarantees for the clearance of the aforesaid cheques on the stipulated dated and undertakes that it is his personal liability to clear the aforesaid cheques and that the cheques pertain to his bank account and are signed and issued by him. If any cheque payment is delayed due to any unforeseen reasons the Appellant agrees to pay normal interest for the said period and the Respondent agrees for the same.

¶29

The Appellant is withdrawing the above Appeal Suit as settled out of court in the aforesaid manner.

¶30

The Respondent undertakes to record full satisfaction in EP.No.4411 of 2012 in OS.No.9997 of 2010 on the file of IX Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, on receipt of the

¶31

2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

AS.No.859 of 2014

¶33

aforesaid amount of Rs.18,00,000/- in his account.

¶34

On recording full satisfaction in EP.No.4411 of 2012 in OS.No.9997 of 2010, the order of attachment in respect of the Appellant's property in EP.No.4411 of 2012 in OS.No.9997 of 2010, pending on the file of the IX Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, shall be raised and the same shall be communicated to the concerned Registrar Office.”

¶35

It is reported that the Appellant has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.18,00,000/- in

¶36

full quit of the claim in the pending execution petition and accordingly, a sum of Rs.18,00,000/- is paid to the Respondent by the Appellant, as per the details furnished in the said Memo of Compromise, dated 20.12.2022. Though

¶37

the payments were acknowledged by way of receipt of post dated cheques, the Appellant has undertaken that it is his personal liability to clear the cheques.

¶38

Recording the submissions of the learned counsel on either side and the Memo of Compromise, dated 20.12.2022, this Appeal Suit is disposed of, in terms of the said Memo of Compromise. The Memo of Compromise, dated 20.12.2022 shall form part of the records. The Appellant is entitled to refund of the Court Fee in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties out of Court. Hence, the Court Fee shall be refunded to the Appellant on proper application being filed.

¶39

(S.S.S.R.J.) & (A.A.N..J.) 20.12.2022 1/2 Index:Yes/No Web:Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking

¶40

3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

AS.No.859 of 2014

Srcm

The Additional District Court (FTC No.I), Chennai

¶45

The Record Keeper, VR Section, Madras High Court

¶46

4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

AS.No.859 of 2014

¶48

S.S.SUNDAR, J. and A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.

Srcm

AS.No.859 of 2014

20.12.2022

5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.Udaya Bhanu v. P.K.Ramalingam Ayyappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Udaya Bhanu v. P.K.Ramalingam Ayyappa

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 Secretary Vs Ramasamy (Died)

N.Kolandasamy(Died) Vs R.Kalayanasundaram

Radhakrishna Naidu Vs Vatsala

Mr.Chinnasamy Vs P.Shanmugam

Bhuvaneswari, Vs S.Balasubramaniam

The Govt. of Tn., Vs Tmt.Visalakshi