Disposed

Velayudam and another v. Mrs.D.Mahalakshmi alias D Poppy

Madras HC10 Jun 2026A/862/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Plaintiffs holding 11/36 share each under a preliminary decree sought appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to divide the suit property by metes and bounds. The court appointed a Commissioner with surveyor assistance and directed filing of the report by the fixed date.

What did the court decide?

Advocate Commissioner R. Kamatchi Sunderesan appointed to divide suit property into 36 shares, allotting 11/36 share each to applicants; report due 25.06.2026.

Velayudam and another Vs Mrs.D.Mahalakshmi alias D Poppy — Partition | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

A No. 862 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10-06-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

¶6

A. No. 862 of 2026 in C.S.No.67 of 2024

¶7

Velayudam S/o.Thirunavukarasu

¶8

Rathi Thripurasundari W/o.Velayudam

¶9

..Applicant(s)

¶10

¶11

Mrs.D.Mahalakshmi alias D Poppy ..Respondent(s)

¶12

Prayer: Application filed under Order XIV, Rule 8 of the O.S. Rules r/w Order XXVI, Rule 9 r/w. Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, praying to appoint an Advocate Commissioner for the purpose of dividing suit “A” schedule property by metes and bounds in tune with the preliminary decree passed by the Hon’ble High Court in C.S.NO.67 of 2024, dated 29.07.2025.

¶13

For Applicants : Mr.A Arokia Satheesh

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This application has been filed by the plaintiffs seeking the appointment

¶16

of an Advocate Commissioner for the purpose of effecting partition in terms of

¶17

the preliminary decree passed by this Court in C.S.No.67 of 2024 on 29.07.2025.

¶18

Page1 of 4

¶19

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

¶20

A No. 862 of 2026

¶21

The applicants/plaintiffs are entitled to 11/36 share each in the suit

¶22

schedule property under the said preliminary decree.

¶23

Notice was ordered to the respondent/defendant. The notice sent to

¶24

the respondent has been returned with the postal endorsement "Not Claimed". In the circumstances, the respondent is deemed to have been served and called absent.

¶25

This Court has perused the preliminary decree dated 29.07.2025 passed in C.S.No.67 of 2024. In order to give effect to the preliminary decree and to work out the rights declared therein, it is necessary to appoint an Advocate Commissioner for effecting division of the suit property by metes and bounds.

¶26

Accordingly, Mr. R. Kamatchi Sunderesan, Advocate (Mobile No.9840044722), is appointed as Advocate Commissioner to inspect the suit property, after giving notice to the respondent/defendant and divide the same into 36 shares, and allot 11/36 share each to the applicants/plaintiffs in accordance with the preliminary decree.

¶27

The Advocate Commissioner is at liberty to take the assistance of a

¶28

Page2 of 4

¶29

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

¶30

A No. 862 of 2026

¶31

qualified Surveyor/Civil Engineer and, if necessary, the assistance of the concerned Revenue Officials for the purpose of measurement and identification of the property. The Advocate Commissioner shall prepare a plan/sketch showing the physical features, measurements, and proposed allotment of shares and file the same along with the report before this Court.

¶32

The applicants/plaintiffs shall pay an initial remuneration of Rs.50,000/- to the Advocate Commissioner directly within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, without prejudice to the final determination of the Commissioner's remuneration by this Court.

¶33

The Advocate Commissioner shall file the report on or before

25.06.2026.

10-06-2026

SRM

To Mr. R. Kamatchi Sunderesan, Advocate, 440, New Additional Law Chambers, High Court, Chennai – 600 104. (Mobile No.9840044722) Email id: [email protected] / [email protected]

¶38

Page3 of 4

¶39

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

¶40

A No. 862 of 2026

¶41

DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.

¶42

SRM

¶43

A No. 862 of 2026 in C.S.No.67 of 2024

¶44

10-06-2026

¶45

__________ Page4 of 4

¶46

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

Velayudam and another v. Mrs.D.Mahalakshmi alias D Poppy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Velayudam and another v. Mrs.D.Mahalakshmi alias D Poppy

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

Sreprasannakumar Vs Prakashini Srihari

M. Kadhar Batcha Vs M. Shai Sheena

K.a.Karthikeyan Vs a.Raja Rajeswari and another

Stephen Arunkumar Lakshmipathy and 15 others Vs No Respondent

G.R.Thulasi(Minor) Vs

Mrs. Amline a P v and Another Vs T. Rupa Rani Esther