Allowed

Manoj Kumar B.Jain v. S.Kushal Raj

Madras HC9 Dec 2022CS/261/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a suit for cancellation of a sale deed and permanent injunctions. The parties executed a joint memorandum of compromise where the plaintiff paid Rs.2 Crore. The High Court decreed the suit in terms of the compromise and ordered the closure of ancillary appeals.

What did the court decide?

The sale deed dated 16.12.2019 is declared null and void; permanent injunctions are granted; a refund of court fee is ordered; ancillary appeals are closed.

Manoj Kumar B.Jain Vs S.Kushal Raj — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

C.S.No.261 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09.12.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶6

C.S.No.261 of 2021 and A.Nos.5413, 5414 of 2022

Manoj Kumar

... Plaintiff

-vs-

1.S.Kushal Raj 2.Mr.Jitendra Kumar.B.Jain, Son of Mr.Babootmal Proprietor of M/s.Jai Jai Ramakrishna Hari No.5, Luckmudoss Street, Park Town, Chennai - 600 003. ... Defendants

¶11

PRAYER : Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules, Read With Order VII Rule 1 of CPC, pleased to pass a judgment and

¶12

decree:-

¶13

(a) To cancel that sale deed dated 16.12.2019 executed by the

¶14

plaintiff in favour of the first defendant which is registered as Document

¶15

1/5

¶16

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

¶17

C.S.No.261 of 2021

¶18

No.7677 of 2019 in the office of Sub Registrar, Purusaiwalkam, Chennai, morefully described in the schedule hereunder.

¶19

(b) To grant permanent injunction restraining the first defendant or

¶20

his men or agents or any one acting on his behalf from in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintiff.

¶21

¶22

any manner alienating, leasing, mortgaging or encumbering the suit schedule property or any part thereof which is morefully detailed hereunder in favour of third parties.

¶23

(d) To direct the first defendant to pay the cost of the suit.

¶24

For Plaintiff : Mr.P.Ramesh Kumar, R.Sivaraman For Defendant 1 : Mr.M.Ganesan For Defendant 2 : ---

¶25

**********

¶26

2/5

¶27

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

¶28

C.S.No.261 of 2021

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

The parties have executed a joint memorandum of compromise dated 09.12.2022. On perusal thereof, the joint memorandum of compromise has been executed by the plaintiff and each of the defendants. The plaintiff and the first defendant are present in person in Court. The suit was filed for cancellation of a sale deed dated 16.12.2019 executed by the plaintiff in favour of the first defendant and for permanent injunctions in relation thereto.

¶31

By the joint memorandum of compromise, the plaintiff has agreed to and paid an aggregate sum of Rs.2 Crore to the first defendant and the first defendant has agreed that the sale deed dated 16.12.2019, which is registered as Document No.7677 of 2019 in the office of the Sub Registrar, Purasaiwalkam, Chennai, be declared as null and void. The first defendant has also agreed to withdraw Cont.P.Nos.614 and 615 of 2022, which were filed against the plaintiff before this Court.

¶32

Upon examining the terms of compromise, I find no legal impediment for the issuance of a decree in terms thereof.

¶33

3/5

¶34

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

¶35

C.S.No.261 of 2021

¶36

Accordingly, C.S.No.261 of 2021 is decreed in terms of the joint

¶37

memorandum of compromise dated 09.12.2022. Such joint memorandum of compromise shall form an integral part of the decree. In view of the settlement, the plaintiff is entitled to a refund of the entire Court fee. Consequently, A.Nos.5413, 5414 of 2022 are closed.

¶38

09.12.2022

¶39

rna Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶40

4/5

¶41

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

¶42

C.S.No.261 of 2021

¶43

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J

¶44

rna

¶45

C.S.No.261 of 2021 and A.Nos.5413, 5414 of 2022

¶46

09.12.2022

¶47

5/5

¶48

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

Manoj Kumar B.Jain v. S.Kushal Raj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar B.Jain v. S.Kushal Raj

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

R.Sridhar Vs Asha Swamy 3 Others

M/S.Victory Vision Home Appliances Pvt.Ltd. Vs United India Insurance Company Ltd. and 2 others

Parthasarathy Vs Nil

V.Nirmala and 3 Others Vs No Respondent

R.S.Lakshmi Vs S.K.Srinivasan and 2 Others

R.Ravichandran and Another Vs No Respondent