Connected second appeals between the same parties over suit properties. One appeal was dismissed for default after counsel reported no instructions; in the other, the High Court set aside the first appellate court's damages decree since the defendants' possession was not proved, restoring the trial court's dismissal.
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.Nos.270 of 2008 & 693 of 1999
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.04.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
S.A.Nos.270 of 2008 & 693 of 1999 and
M.P.No.1 of 2008
| In S.A.No.270 of 2008: | |
|---|---|
| 1.S.Manohar Chand 2.S.Mohan Chand |
|
| 3.G.Santhilal | ... Appellants |
| vs. | |
| 1.Arockiaraj | |
| 2.Jayapalan | ... Respondents |
| In S.A.No.693 of 1999: | |
| 1.Arockiaraj | |
| 2.Jayapalan | |
| 3.Pauline | ... Appellants |
| vs. 1.Manoharchand |
|
| 2.Mohan | |
| 3.Santhilal | ...Respondents |
| Prayer in S.A.No.270 of 2008:- Second Appeal filed |
under Section 100 |
| of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment | and decree dated |
Page 1 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.Nos.270 of 2008 & 693 of 1999
19.09.2006 in A.S.No.14 of 2006 passed by the learned Sub Judge, Panruti, confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.08.2005 in O.S.No.76 of 1998 passed by the learned District Munsif, Panruti.
Prayer in S.A.No.693 of 1999:- Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 11.01.1999 in A.S.No.2 of 1998 passed by the learned Sub Judge, Panruti, reversing the judgment and decree dated 11.11.1997 in O.S.No.923 of 1993 passed by the learned District Munsif, Panruti.
For appellants in
S.A.No.693 of 1999 : Mr.T.Dhanyakumar
For respondents in
S.A.No.693 of 1999 : No appearance
For appellants in
S.A.No.270 of 2008 : Ms.Abirami
For respondents in
S.A.No.270 of 2008 : Mr.T.Dhanyakumar
C O M M O N J U D G M E N T
The Second Appeal in S.A.No.270 of 2008 arises out of a suit in
O.S.No.76 of 1998 for the relief of declaration and recovery of possession. The other connected second appeal in S.A.No.693 of 1999
Page 2 of 7
S.A.Nos.270 of 2008 & 693 of 1999
arises out of a suit in O.S.No.923 of 1993 which was filed by the same plaintiffs in O.S.No.76 of 1998, claiming damages.
the same, these two Second Appeals are considered and decided by this common judgment.
appellants would submit that in spite of her best efforts, she is not in a position to get instructions from her clients. Hence, she reported “no instructions”.
Page 3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.Nos.270 of 2008 & 693 of 1999
of 2008, the another Second Appeal in S.A.No.693 of 1999 is decided as follows:
Page 4 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.Nos.270 of 2008 & 693 of 1999
ground that the appellants herein were in possession and enjoyment of the suit property and therefore, they are bound to pay damages to the respondents herein. Though the Trial Court has dismissed the said plea, the First Appellate Court has reversed the finding and directed the appellants herein to pay damages to the respondents herein.
by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court in A.S.No.2 of 1998 by confirming the judgment and decree
Page 5 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.Nos.270 of 2008 & 693 of 1999
passed by the Trial Court in O.S.No.923 of 1993. Connected miscellaneous petition, if any, is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
04.04.2024
Internet : Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order apd
To
Page 6 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.Nos.270 of 2008 & 693 of 1999
C.KUMARAPPAN,J.
apd
S.A.Nos.270 of 2008 & 693 of 1999
04.04.2024
Page 7 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S.Manohar Chand
S.Mohan Chand
G.Santhilal
Arockiaraj
Jayapalan
Pauline
C.Kumarappan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
