Dismissed¶35

Chinnaraj v. M.P. Murugesan

Madras HC9 Jul 2025AS/470/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of Appeal Suit A.S.No.470 of 2018 (Chinnaraji v. M.P.Murugesan & 5 ors., Madras High Court, 09.07.2025): appeal under Section 96 CPC against decree dated 14.02.2017 in O.S.No.271 of 2013, II Additional District Court, Salem; earlier dismissal as settled out of Court on compromise memo dated 16.06.2025 revisited after first respondent denied any settlement; appeal permitted to be withdrawn and dismissed as withdrawn, no costs; order 'for being spoken to'.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to the appellant to withdraw the Appeal Suit; Appeal Suit dismissed as withdrawn; no costs awarded. ¶35

Chinnaraj Vs M.P. Murugesan — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

A.S. NO.470 OF 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 09.07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL

¶6

A.S.NO.470 OF 2018

Chinnaraji

... Appellant

Vs.

M.P.Murugesan

¶11

Marappa Gounder

¶12

Muthuayee

¶13

Mani

¶14

Sasikumar

¶15

Kalaiyarasan ... Respondents

¶16

PRAYER : This Appeal Suit filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, praying to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated February 14, 2017 passed in O.S.No.271 of 2013 on the file of the II Additional District Court, Salem.

¶17

For Appellant : Ms.R.Meenal For R1 : Ms.Chitra Maragatham for M/s.P.Veena Suresh For R2 to R6 : Mr.B.Santhana Gopala Krishnan for Mr.R.Nalliyappan

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

When the matter was listed before this Court on June 25,

¶20

2025, Ms.R.Meenal, learned counsel on record for the appellant, filed a memo dated June 16, 2025, along with a letter dated June 13, 2025,

¶21

Page No.1 of 4

¶22

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

¶23

A.S. NO.470 OF 2018

¶24

written by the appellant, seeking permission of this Court to withdraw the Appeal Suit on the ground that the appellant and the respondents have arrived at a compromise and settled the matter out of Court. The said memo was duly signed by the learned counsel for the appellant as well as by the respondents, stating 'no objection'. Accordingly, recording the said memo, the Appeal Suit was dismissed as settled out of Court on June 25, 2025.

¶25

2.However, on the very next day, i.e., June 26, 2025, before the order was signed and despatched, the learned counsel on record for the first respondent appeared before the Court and submitted that the matter was not, in fact, settled out of Court. However, she stated that she had no objection for the withdrawal of the Appeal Suit. Accordingly, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption 'for being spoken to'.

¶26

3.Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, Ms.R.Meenal, learned counsel on record for the appellant; Ms.Chitra Maragatham, representing Ms.P.Veena Suresh, learned counsel on record for the first respondent; and Mr.B.Santhana Gopala Krishnan, representing Mr.R.Nalliyappan, learned counsel on record for respondents 2 to 6, appeared before this Court.

¶27

Page No.2 of 4

¶28

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

¶29

A.S. NO.470 OF 2018

¶30

4.The learned counsel for the appellant submits that although

¶31

the matter was compromised between the parties, she seeks permission of

¶32

this Court to withdraw the appeal, rather than having it dismissed as settled out of Court.

¶33

5.Learned Counsel appearing for the first respondent reiterates that no compromise was entered into between the appellant and the respondents. However, she has no objection for the withdrawal of the Appeal Suit.

¶34

6.In view of the submissions made by both sides, this Court

¶35

permits the appellant to withdraw the Appeal Suit. Accordingly, this Appeal Suit is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.

¶36

09.07.2025

¶37

Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No AV/TK

¶38

¶39

The II Additional District Court, Salem.

¶40