Allowed

Sam David v. State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC1 Apr 2022SA(MD)/814/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court allowed the second appeal filed by Sam David. The court decreed the suit as prayed for, granting liberty to the appellant to offer compensation to the first respondent within twelve weeks to avoid executing the decree.

What did the court decide?

Suit decreed as prayed for; Appellant given liberty to offer compensation to First Respondent; First Respondent directed to consider and compensate within twelve weeks; Second Appeal allowed; No costs

Sam David Vs State of Tamilnadu — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

SA(MD). No.814 of 2010

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI

¶3

( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

¶4

Friday, the First day of April Two Thousand Twenty Two

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶7

SA(MD). No.814 of 2010

¶8

SAM DAVID

¶9

... Appellant/Appellant/Plaintiff

¶10

¶11

1 STATE OF TAMILNADU

¶12

RP. BY ITS DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANYAKUMARI DIST, NAGERCOIL, VADASERY VILLAGE, AGASTHEESWARAM

¶13

TALUK, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

¶14

2 COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT UNION, MUNCHIRAI, MUNCHIRAI DESOM, ARUDESOM VILLAGE, VILAVANCODE TALUK, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

¶15

3 SUKUMARAN

¶16

4 JEYAKUMAR ... RespondentS 1- 4/Respondents Defendants 1 – 4

¶17

(Respondents 3 and 4 remained ex-parte in both the courts below, and notice need not go to them in the Second Appeal)

¶18

Prayer:-

¶19

Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Kuzhithurai, dated 24.11.2009 made in A.S.No.141 of 2006, confirming the judgment and decree of the II Addl.District Munsif Court, Kuzhithurai, dated 10.01.2006 made in O.S.No.363 of 1995.

¶20

DECREE:-

¶21

This Second Appeal 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.K.N.Thampi Advocate for the Appellant and of Mr.R.Ragavendran Government Advocate for the First and Second Respondent, this https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Court doth order and decree as follows:-

¶22

1/3

¶23

SA(MD). No.814 of 2010

¶24

(1)The Suit is decreed as prayed for.

¶25

(2) That the appellant is given liberty to submit a representation to the first respondent offering to settle the matter by accepting compensation;

¶26

(3) If such representation is given that the First Respondent is directed to consider the same in accordance with law and appropriately compensate the appellant;

¶27

(4) that on such receipt of such representation , the first Respondent shall dispose it of within a period of twelve weeks thereafter. If the First Respondent is not willing to compensate the appellant, it is always to the appellant herein to execute this decree;

¶28

(5) that the Second Appeal is Allowed;

¶29

(6) That there be no costs in this Second Appeal.

¶30

Assistant Registrar (CS-III)

¶31

// True Copy //

¶32

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Enclosed herewith Copy of the Schedule of Property

¶33

¶34

1.The Subordinate Judge Kuzhithurai.

¶35

2.The II Additional District Munsif, Kuzhithurai.

¶36

Copy to:

¶37

The Section Officer, V.R. Section,

¶38

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 2 Copies

¶39

+1 CC to M/s.K.N.THAMPI, Advocate ( SR-16151 dated /2022 )

¶40

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-16312 /2022 )

¶41

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

¶42

2/3

¶43

SA(MD). No.814 of 2010

¶44

ORDER DATED : 01/04/2022 ========================== DECREE ========================== SA(MD). No.814 of 2010 While Allowing this Second Appeal preferred against the Judgment and Decree dated 24/11/2009 made in Appeal Suit No.141 of 2006 on the file of the Subordinate Judge , Kuzhithurai and Confirming the Judgment and decree , dated 10/01/2006 made in Original Suit No.363/1995 on the file of the Kuzhithurai District Munsif etc., as stated within. RD(07.06.2022) 3P 7C

¶45

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

¶46

3/3

Sam David v. State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sam David v. State of Tamilnadu

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

Seenivasan(Died) Vs Jeyaraman(Died)

A.Ramasubbu, (Died) Vs R.Ranjitham

D.Marianayagam (Died) Vs K.Kanthiah (Died)

Ganesan Vs v.Krishnan

D.Chinna Katteshwari, Vs M.Perumal Nadalvar (Died)

Tuticorin Vegatable Marketing Vs Tuticorin Municipal