Single judge Bench dismissed a second appeal, holding that since execution completed and possession was handed over to the respondent, no substantive issue survives for consideration.
Disposal of the Second Appeal; closure of the connected miscellaneous petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
S.A.No.606 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.12.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
Second Appeal No.606 of 2017 and Civil Miscellaneous Petition No.15101 of 2017
Sivanandha Valli (Died)
1.Rajalakshmi 2.Velmani 3.Elavarasi ... Appellants
Versus
Narayanasamy ...Respondent
Prayer: The Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the Judgment and Decree made in A.S.No.143 of 2007, dated 30.01.2009, on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Vridhachalam and confirming the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.725 of 2004, dated 20.09.2007 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif, Vridhachalam.
For Appellants : Ms.M.Meena Rukmani For Mrs.AL.Gandhimathi
For Respondent : Mr.T.Sezhian For Mrs.R.Meenal
1/5
S.A.No.606 of 2017
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel for the respondent had filed a Memo, which is as follows:
The appellants filed O.S.No.725 of 2004 before the II Additional District Munif, Vridhachalam for declaration, injunction and in the alternative for recovery of possession if respondent entered into the suit property pending proceedings. The respondent filed written statement and counter claim for mandatory injunction to remove the house constructed by them. The trial court dismissed the suit and allowed the counter claim by the respondent. The appellants filed A.S.No.143 of 2007 before the Principal Sub Court, Vridhachalam which was also dismissed.
The appellants preferred S.A.sr.No.57801 of 2009 before this Hon'ble Court with an application for condoning the delay of 44 days in filing the above appeal. The delay was condoned and appeal was numbered as S.A.No.606 of 2017. Pursuant to the order of decree in counter claim the respondent filed
2/5
S.A.No.606 of 2017
Execution Petition in E.P.No.185 of 2009 before the District Munsif, Vridhachalam. After hearing both sides the learned Judge was pleased to issue warrant and the respondent herein permitted to remove the house and fencing available in the property through Court. The warrant has been executed and possession was handed over by the Court Bailiff to the respondent on 18.8.2017. The report has been recorded and E.P. was terminated. Since the appellants participated in the Execution proceedings and possession was taken by the respondent in the presence of the appellants nothing survives in the appeal. Therefore the above appeal may be dismissed.
It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to record the memo and thus render justice.
Dated at Madras this the 24th May of January 2022
Sd/-................. Counsel for Respondent”
3/5
S.A.No.606 of 2017
Principal District Munsif, Vridhachalam had made the following endorsement.
“Property delivered, warrant returned with JB endorsement, delivery recorded, this EP is terminated.”
the Second Appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
12.12.2022
ssi
Index:Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No
To
4/5
S.A.No.606 of 2017
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.,
ssi
S.A.No.606 of 2017 and C.M.P.No.15101 of 2017
12.12.2022
5/5
Rajalakshmi and others
Narayanasamy
C.V. Karthikeyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
