S.Arumugam Vs a. Thirumeni Narthevar(Died) — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

S.Arumugam Vs a. Thirumeni Narthevar(Died) — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Second appeal disposed of in terms of the joint memo of compromise dated 09.02.2026; Joint Memo of Compromise directed to form part of the Decree; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the disputes between the parties stood amicably settled so as to permit disposal of the second appeal in terms of the joint memo of compromise dated 09.02.2026.

Court's answer

In view of the amicable settlement recorded in the joint memo of compromise dated 09.02.2026, the second appeal is disposed of in terms of that compromise memo; the Joint Memo of Compromise shall form part of the Decree; no costs.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Second Appeal SA(MD).No.40 of 2017, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (T.V. Thamilselvi, J.), decided 15.07.2026, arising from suit O.S.No.35 of 2004 (District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Orathanadu) seeking declaration and permanent injunction over 3 items of suit property; the trial Court decreed the first item and rejected the other two (decree dated 27.04.2009); cross first appeals A.S.No.16 of 2009 (1st party, allowed portion) and A.S.No.21 of 2009 (2nd party, disallowed portion) were both dismissed; A.S.No.16 of 2009 (Sub Court, Pattukkottai, decree dated 30.11.2009) was the impugned judgment. On the joint memo of compromise dated 09.02.2026 recording settlement between the families — relinquishment by the 2nd party of rights over Survey No.161 B/13 with a 13.2 meter (length) x 12 feet (width) road strip to be transferred to the Panchayath board and change of patta over the balance in favour of the 1st party; division of the 2nd item (3.5 cents southern side to the 2nd party, balance with change of patta to the 1st party); and total relinquishment of the 3rd item in favour of the 1st party — the second appeal was disposed of in terms of the compromise memo dated 09.02.2026; the Joint Memo of Compromise was directed to form part of the Decree; no costs. Legal representatives were brought on record by orders dated 21.06.2024 (CMP(MD)Nos.7668, 7669 and 7672 of 2024) and 15.07.2024 (CMP(MD)No.8713 of 2024). No precedent was cited or discussed.

SA(MD). No.40 of 2017

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Dated : 15/07/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

SA(MD). No.40 of 2017

S.Arumugam (Died)

... 1^st Defendant/1^st Appellant

1.A.Bharathi

2.Alamelu

3.Kalaiyarasi

... Third Parties/Appellants

Vs

1.A.Thirumeni Narthevar (Died) ... Plaintiff/Respondent/Respondent

2.A.Senthilkumar

... Third Party/Respondent

3.Kumuthavalli

4.Murugaramsing

5.Baskaran

[R3 to R5 are brought on record as LRs of the deceased 1^st respondent vide order dated 21.06.2024 made in CMP(MD)Nos.7668, 7669 and 7672 of 2024]

6.Senthilkumar

[R6 is also brought on record as LR of the deceased 1^st respondent vide order dated 15.07.2024 in CMP(MD)No.8713 of 2024]

... Respondents

1/6

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

SA(MD). No.40 of 2017

PRAYER :-

Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the decree and judgment of the Sub Court, Pattukkottai, dated 30.11.2009 passed in A.S.No.16 of 2009 confirming the decree and judgment of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Orathanadu dated 27.04.2009 passed in O.S.No.35 of 2004.

For Appellants : Mr.A.Senthilkumar For Respondents : Mr.L.Jeen Felix for R2

JUDGMENT

The second appeal is filed against the judgment and decree of the Sub Court, Pattukkottai, dated 30.11.2009 passed in A.S.No.16 of 2009 confirming the judgment and decree of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Orathanadu dated 27.04.2009 passed in O.S.No.35 of 2004.

2.When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent would submit that the disputes between the parties have been amicably settled and they filed a joint

2/6

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

SA(MD). No.40 of 2017

memo of compromise dated 09.02.2026. The joint compromise memo reads as follows:-

The 2^nd party has filed a suit as against the 1^st party seeking declaration and permanent injunction regarding suit schedule properties of 3 items. The trial Court regarding 1^st item of the property was decreed and rejected other two items and further as against allowed portion, the 1^st party filed appeal suit in A.S.No.16/2009 and disallowed portion, the 2^nd party filed A.S.No.21/2009 both the appeal was dismissed, as against the same, the present two appeals the 1^st party filed in S.A. (MD)No. 40/2017 and the 2^nd party filed in S.A. (MD)No.222/2017 as of now both the appeal are pending adjudication.

It is submitted that due to the intervention of elders and friends, an amicable settlement has been arrived between the 1^st party and the 2^nd party and in accordance with the same; an agreement deed for compromise was executed between both the parties voluntarily without any compulsion as per given below and another separate compromise memo also filed for S.A. (MD)No.222/2017.

In respect of 1^st item of suit property in Survey No. 161 B/13 which is now stance under joint patta of both parties, and the 2^nd party shall relinquish their rights over

3/6

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

SA(MD). No.40 of 2017

the said survey number in favour of 1^st party and further mutually agree to give 13.2 meters in length and 12 feet width of land for road purposes in the above said survey number and both parties agree to transfer the said extent in favour of the Panchayath board, as per local requirement and balance property in the said survey number the 1^st party can change patta in their name.

In respect of 2^nd item of suit property which is now stance under joint patta of both parties to an extant of 4.50 arce out the same the 2^nd party shall enjoy the 3.5 cents southern side and change their name in respect of the above said cents and balance of the property shall enjoy and change patta in the names of 1^st party, for which both parties are given consent.

In respect of 3^rd item of suit property which is now stance under joint patta of both parties and the 2^nd party shall relinquish their rights over the said survey number totally in favor of 1^st party and they can change patta in their names for which the 2^nd party have given consent and further as per the compromise respective parties portion they have to clear the pushes and clean the trees for the disturbance of respective parties.

4/6

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

SA(MD). No.40 of 2017

The above terms have been arrived at after detailed discussion and full mutual consent of both families. The both parties agree that the present compromise fully settles all issues between them in these appeals and in the related suit proceedings.”

3.In the light of the above mentioned facts, this second appeal is

disposed of in terms of the compromise memo dated 09.02.2026. The Joint Memo of Compromise shall form part of the Decree. No costs.

15.07.2026

sji NCC : Yes/No TO

To

1.The Sub Court, Pattukkottai.

2.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Orathanadu.

3.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

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

SA(MD). No.40 of 2017

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

sji

ORDER IN SA(MD) No.40 of 2017

Date : 15/07/2026

6/6

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