Second appeal concerning shares in family suit property was settled out of court. A joint compromise memo was filed; the parties were identified and signed the terms, and the appeal was disposed of in terms of the compromise memo, which forms part of the decree.
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.
2024:MHC:4194
S.A.No.414 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.12.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
S.A.No.414 of 2012
Vs
Page 1 of 6
S.A.No.414 of 2012
Mayiladuthurai Town, Nagapattinam District.
S/o Ramanathan Chettiar South Salia Street Koranadu Mayiladuthurai Town Nagapattinam District.
S/o Muthiyan Chettiar 13/8 Vedachalam Thottam Mandaveli, Chennai -28 ....
Respondents
PRAYER: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C against to set
aside the Judgement and Decree of the District Court, Nagapattinam, dated 27.09.2011 made in A.S.No.12 of 2011 confirming the judgement and
decree of the Principal Sub Court, Mayiladuturai, dated 22.12.2010 made
in O.S.No.57 of 2009.
For Appellants : Mr.S/Arivazhagan
For Respondents : Mr.T.Thiyagarajan for RR1, 4, &5
:Mr.A.Muthukumar for R2 :Mr.B.Jawahar for R3
Page 2 of 6
S.A.No.414 of 2012
JUDGEMENT
When the matter is taken up today, both sides learned counsel made a joint submission that the matter has been settled out of Court and the terms of settlement have been reduced in writing. In this regard, a joint compromise memo is filed before this Court.
and they are identified by their respective learned Counsel. The 1st respondent died. As per the terms of the compromise, the appeal against the respondents 4 & 5 is to be dismissed and that has been agreed by the appellant as well and he has endorsed his signature.
the appellants. He has also affixed his signature as per the terms by agreeing to the terms of the compromise.
4. The 2nd respondent has agreed that he has got no right or title in respect of the agricultural land allotted in OS.No.130/99 to the parties,
Page 3 of 6
S.A.No.414 of 2012
wherein shares have been allotted in favour of the appellants and the 3rd respondent. The 2nd respondent limits his interest with that of the share allotted to him in the first item of the suit 'A' schedule in which he has been given the eastern half.
5. The terms of the compromise memo are read to the parties, and
they have stated that they have understood the terms and then only affixed their signatures. Hence the compromise memo is recorded.
6. In view of the same, this second appeal is disposed of as settled in terms of the joint compromise memo filed, which shall form part of the decree. The parties are to bear the necessary incidental Court Fees or stamp duty that might arise.
16.12.2024
Index: Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes / No jrs
Page 4 of 6
S.A.No.414 of 2012
Page 5 of 6
S.A.No.414 of 2012
R.N.MANJULA ,J.
jrs
S.A.No.414 of 2012
16.12.2024
Page 6 of 6
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Govindarajan
Nagalakshmi
Usha
Kamalam (deceased)
Dhanusu
Raju
R.N.MANJULA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
