Disposed

N Man Mohan Raj v. Church of South India Trust Association

Telangana HC31 Dec 2021CMA/1217/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil miscellaneous appeal (CMA No.1217 of 2018), the High Court of Telangana disposed of the matter and vacated interim orders based on settlement memos filed by the parties, where the respondent agreed to pay Rs.10,00,000/- with a portion paid via cheque and the balance to be released upon withdrawal of the underlying suit.

What did the court decide?

The civil miscellaneous appeal is disposed of based on settlement memos filed by the parties; interim orders granted earlier are vacated.

N Man Mohan Raj Vs Church of South India Trust Association — Telangana HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERAB.AD

¶2

FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECETMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶5

CIVIL MISCEL LANEOU S APPE AL NO i 1217 0 F 2018

¶6

Appeal Under order 43 Rule 1 of cpc against the order/decree in 1A.No.1285 of 2014 in o.s,No.50 of 2014 dated 23.10,2018 on the fire of the court of the principar District Judge at Nizamabad.

¶7

Between:

¶8

N. IVlan Mohan Rai,-Slo_ late Venkatrajam Garu, aged about g0 years, Occ: Senior Advocate, r.tci s-o-sr oia, slrrs,iriinl r.raeiar, Nizamabad

¶9

.Appel lants/Petitioner/Plai ntiffs

¶10

AND

¶11

church of South rndia Trust Association, Armoor represenied by church of South lndia, Medak Diocese, Diocesan office, 1O_3_i 65, Church'Htuse-. O-la Lance Lane, Secunderabad -5oo02s represented oy its'cen rrotobiFin#.i"r Administrator and Moderators Commissary.

¶12

I,ilr'Jonathan Dharmaraj s/o.Late p.D.samuer, Aged 54 years, occ: Financiar Administrator, Ivledak District.

¶13

Rl.Rey. Dr.Go_vada Dyvasirvadam S/o.Late G.Devamomy, Aged 5.1 years, Occ: [/oderator's Commis3ary, Medak District.

¶14

Both Rl/o. CSI Diocesan Office, Old Lancer Lane, Secunderabad.

¶15

...Respondents/RespondenUDefendant

¶16

Counsel for the Appellant: SRI T. V. KALYAN STNGH

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI J. PRABHAKAR, Senior Counsel Rep.

¶18

SRI A. SRINIVAS

¶19

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶20

-2

¶21

i (

¶22

THE I ION'BLE SRI^{JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO} AND THE I ON'BLE SMT^{JUSTICEP. SREE SUDHA}

¶23

CIVIL M- SC^{ELLANEOUS APPEALNo.L2L70F 2018}

¶24

JUDGMENTI lP r^{Hon'ble Si Justice P.NaueettRaol}

¶25

Heard S'i T.V. Kalyan Singh,^{learned counsel for the} appellant, and lri J.^{Prabhakar, learned senior counsel appearing} for the respond :nts.

¶26

The appt llant as well as l"t^{respondentfiled two separate} memos statine that the^inter se^{dispute stands resolvedThe} memos disclos that the^{Church of South India TrustAssociation} agreed to pay an amount of^{Rs.1O,O0,0OO/-as lull and final} settlement of s uit claim to^{the appellant.The appellant is given} cheque bearin; . No.771142^drawn on^{State Bank of lndia dated} 15.12.2021 for an amount^{of Rs.7,00,00O/-.The balanceamount} to be paid on withdrawal of^{O'S.No.SO of 2Ol4 pending in the} Court of the Di ;trict Judge,^Nizamabad.

¶27

Learned senior counsel appearing for^{the Churchol South} India Trust I ssociation states that his client^agreed to^pay Rs.1O,OO,OO0/ to the appellant. However, there is some technical issue with refe^'ence to cheque bearing No.771 142 drawn on State Bank of India, -hey intend to withdraw the same and a new cheque bearing No.3 18284 dated 15.12.2021 for an amount of Rs.7,00,000/ - drawn on Indian Bank, Secunderabad, is being handed over o the appellant through their counsel. Learned senior counsel assures that this amount will be honoured by the bank and in a< dition, amount of Rs.3,00,000/- is agreed to be paid

¶28

¶29

-3

¶30

by the Church of South India Trust Association to the appellant on withdrawal of O.S.No.SO of 2014 pending in the Court of the District Judge, Nizamabad.

¶31

In view of the same, both the jearned counsel agree that appeal can be disposed of by recording the respective memos.

¶32

5 The memos dated 31.12.202I filed on behalf of appellant and 1"t respondent are taken on record.

¶33

The civil miscellaneous appeal is accordingly disposed of in terms of the memos filed on behalf of the appellant and lst respondent. The interim orders granted earlier stand vacated.

¶34

SD/.K.SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR

,TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

'1 . The Principal District Judge at Nizamabad, Nizamabad^District'

¶41

One CC to Sri T.^{V. Kalyan Singh, Advocate} [OPUC]

¶42

One GC to Sri J.^{Prabhakarfor A. Srinivas, AdvocateIOPUC]}

¶43

Two CD Copies

¶44

One Spare^CoPY gbr

\{!

HIGH^COURT

DATED:^311121'-021

JUDGMENT

o
tl 6 rr, r! xlii,
vu,-r"_1-,u-r.

¶50

CMA.No.1217 of²⁰¹⁸

¶51

DISPOSING^(IF THE CMA NO COSTS

¶52

\ r 1---
Ju-
$..{ Y

N Man Mohan Raj v. Church of South India Trust Association

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N Man Mohan Raj v. Church of South India Trust Association

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union of India Vs P. Rajasekhar

Karishma Rao Erraballi Vs T. Balamma and 5 others

Smt. B.Ruthamma Vs Union of India

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Chitrala Chandrakala and 7 Others

M/s. Indukuri Life Spaces LLP Vs Sri. C. Kumar Goud and 4 Others

Reliancce Gneral Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Bommakanti Bhumalingam and 3 Others