Separajan Vs Devarajan

(Appellants 6 to 9 brought on record as Lrs of the deceased A1 viz., Separajan, vide Court order dated 11.07.2024 made in CMP.Nos. 13939, 13940 & 13942 of 2021)

¶26

..Appellant(s)

¶27

Vs

¶28

Devarajan S/o Venkatarama Reddiar, Thottiam, Musiri Taluk.

¶29

Mani Mohan S/o Devarajan, Thottiam, Musiri Taluk.

¶30

Vijayakumar S/o Devarajan, Thottiam, Musiri Taluk.

¶31

Kalaivani D/o Devarajan, Thottiam, Musiri Taluk.

¶32

Kuppiah Andi Kavalkarapatti, Namakkal Taluk.

¶33

Palaniandi Kavalkarapatti, Namakkal Taluk.

¶34

Thandappan Kavalkarapatti, Namakkal Taluk.

¶35

Chellammal Alias Chellayee W/o Chinnappan Alias Chelliah, Kavalkarapatti, Namakkal Taluk.

¶36

Ravi

¶37

S/o Dasaratharajan, Erumaipatti, Namakkal Taluk.

¶38

..Respondent(s)

¶39

__________ Page2 of 8

¶40

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

¶41

SA No. 53 of 2010

¶42

SA No. 1334 of 2009

¶43

Manimohan

¶44

S/o. Devaraj Elurpatti Musiri Tk Trichy Dist.

¶45

Vijayakumar S/o. Devaraj Elurpatti Musiri Tk Trichy Dist.

¶46

Kalaivani D/o. Devaraj Elurpatti Musiri Tk Trichy Dist.

¶47

..Appellant(s)

¶48

Vs

¶49

Devarajan S/o. Venkatrama Reddiar Thottiyam Village Musiri Tk Trichy Dist.

¶50

Separajan S/o. Venkatrama Reddiar Elurpatti Namakkal Tk.

¶51

Selvaraj S/o. Venkatrama Reddiar Elurpatti Namakkal Tk.

¶52

Rajambu Ammal W/o. Venkatrama Reddiar Elurpatti Namakkal Tk.

¶53

Jayalakshmi W/o. A Udhayakumar No30 Logamaniya Street Rs Puram Kovai Dist.

¶54

Saraswathi W/o. Vasudeva Reddiar Devamangalam Post Samayapuram Trichy Dist.

¶55

Kuppaiyandi S/o. Veerasangu Kavakarapatti Namakkal Tk.

¶56

Palaniyandi S/o. Veerasangu Kavakarapatti Namakkal Tk.

¶57

__________ Page3 of 8

¶58

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

¶59

SA No. 53 of 2010

¶60

9. Thandappan

¶61

S/o. Veerasangu Kavakarapatti Namakkal Tk.

¶62

10.Chellayee W/o. Chinnapavvan Kavakarapatti Namakkal Tk.

¶63

11.Ravi S/o. Dhasaradharajan Reddiar Erumaipatti Namakkal Tk.

¶64

..Respondent(s)

¶65

S.A.No.53 of 2010

¶66

PRAYER : Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., to set aside the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Namakkal, dated 28.08.2009 made in A.S.No.96 of 2005, confirming the judgment and decree of the learned District Munsif, Namakkal dated 31.01.2005 made in O.S.No.139 of 2004.

¶67

S.A.No.1334 of 2009

¶68

PRAYER : Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., to set aside the judgment and decree dated 28.08.2009 made in A.S.No.165 of 2005 on the file of the Sub Court, Namakkal, confirming the judgment and decree dated 31.01.2005 made in O.S.No.139 of 2004 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Namakkal.

¶69

SA No. 53 of 2010

¶70

For Appellant(s): Mr.C.Jagadish For Respondent(s): Mr T.Dhanyakumar for Rr2 To 4

¶71

Page4 of 8

¶72

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

¶73

SA No. 53 of 2010

¶74

SA No. 1334 of 2010

¶75

For Appellant(s): Mr.T.Dhanyakumar

¶76

For Respondent(s): Mr.C.Jagadish, for RR 3, 5 and 6

¶77

JUDGMENT

¶78

S.A.No.53 of 2010 has been filed challenging the preliminary decree in

¶79

respect of ‘C’ Schedule property in favour of the plaintiff. This Appeal has been filed by the defendants.

¶80

S.A.No.1334 of 2009 has been filed by the plaintiffs challenging the

¶81

judgment and decree refusing to grant preliminary decree in respect of ‘B’ Schedule property.

¶82

The plaintiffs are the legal heirs born through the first wife of Venkatarama Reddy. The defendants are the legal heirs born through the second wife of Venkatarama Reddy. The defendants 7 to 11 in S.A.No.1334 of 2009 are the purchasers of the ‘B’ Schedule property. Defendants 1 to 6 are the legal heirs born through the second wife of Venkatarama Reddy and their children. The Suit has been dismissed in respect of ‘B’ Schedule property.

¶83

Page5 of 8

¶84

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

¶85

SA No. 53 of 2010

¶86

Before this Court, a compromise memo has been filed by the appellants

¶87

in both the Appeals. The Appellants in both the Appeals are present and the appellants 2, 4 and 5 in S.A.No.53 of 2010 are appeared through Video Conferencing. Their identity has been established by the learned counsel appearing for the Appellants. All other appellants in S.A.No.1334 of 2009 are present before this Court and other appellants in S.A.No.53 of 2010 are present in the Court. They are also identified by the respective learned counsels.

¶88

In the compromise memo, it is agreed that in ‘C’ Schedule, item 1 and 13 to 18 were allotted to the 9th appellant in S.A.No.53 of 2010 and in the same ‘C’ Schedule, items 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 12 were allotted to 8th appellant in S.A.No.53 of 2010 and item 8 of ‘C’ Schedule property, an around 1.04 ½ acres were jointly allotted to the Manimohan, Vijayakumar, Kalaivani and Vimala, the respondents 2, 3, 4 and 10 in S.A.No.53 of 2010. Similarly, in schedule ‘C’ after leaving a path, an extent of 1.16 ½ in Survey No.317/1 were allotted to respondents 2, 3, 4 and 10 in S.A.No.53 of 2010. It is also agreed that the 9^th appellant has to take care of the 2^nd appellant viz ., Selvaraj and it is also agreed that the 8^th appellant has to pay a sum of Rs.3,80,000/- by Demand Draft to the 5^th defendant viz ., Jayalakshmi. Similarly, the same amount of Rs.3,80,000/- has to be paid to the 6^th defendant viz ., Saraswathi by the 9^th appellant.

¶89

__________ Page6 of 8

¶90

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

¶91

SA No. 53 of 2010

¶92

The said joint compromise memo is taken on record and both the

¶93

Appeals are disposed of in terms of joint memo of compromise. The joint compromise memo shall form part of the decree and judgment and the final decree shall be drafted in terms of the compromise memo filed by the parties. The parties shall request for non-judicial papers for endorsing the final decree within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶94

26-02-2026

¶95

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶96

GSK

¶97

To

¶98