Madras High Court
Annakkili vs Dakshinamurthy on 21 April, 2021
A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001
and C.M.P.Nos.5955, 5982 &5986 of 2019
A.S.No.783 of 2001
Annakkili ... Appellant
Vs
1. Dakshinamurthy
2. Durai
3.Vasuki (Died)
4.Arivazhi
5.Valluvan
6.Banu
7.Minor Karthikeyan
8.Minor Kavitha
9.S.Tamilselvi
10.S.Sathish Kumar ..Respondents
(R9 & R10 are brought on record
as L/R's of the deceased R3 vide
order of this Court dated 20.12.2007
made in C.M.P.Nos. 14 to 16/2007)
(R7 & R8 declared as major vide order
of Court dated 20.12.2007 made in
C.M.P.No.39/2007 and their guardian
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001
Banu revoked from guardianship
vide order of Court dated 20.12.2007
made in C.M.P.No.39 of 2007)
Prayer : First Appeal filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code
against the Decree and Judgment dated 24.07.1997 made in O.S.No.3907/89
on the file of the VI Additional Judge/City Civil Court, Chennai.
For Appellant .. Mr.M.V.Venkatasesham
For Respondents .. Mr.R.Prabakar
(R2,R6, R7 to 10)
No appearance (R4 & R5)
A.S.No.1017 of 2001
Annakili ... Appellant
Vs
1. Dakshinamurthy
2. Durai
3.Vasuki (Died)
4.M.Banu
5.Minor Karthikeyan
6.Minor Kavitha
7.S.Tamilselvi
8.S.Sathish Kumar ..Respondents
(R7 & R8 are brought on record
as L/R's of the deceased R3 vide
order of this Court dated 20.12.2007
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001
made in C.M.P.Nos. 11 to 13/2007)
(R5 & R6 declared as major and their guardian
Banu revoked from guardianship
vide order of Court dated 20.12.2007
made in C.M.P.No.40 of 2007)
Prayer : First Appeal filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code
against the Decree and Judgment dated 24.07.1997 made in O.S.No.7373/88
on the file of the VI Additional Judge/City Civil Court, Chennai.
For Appellant .. Mr.M.V.Venkatasesham
For Respondents .. Mr.R.Prabakar
(R2,R4 to 8)
COMMON J U D G M ENT
When these matters are taken up for hearing, Mr.R.Prabhakar the
learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2,6 to 10 in A.S.No.783 of
2001 filed a Memo dated 02.07.2015 stating that the first respondent namely
Dakshinamurthy passed away on 19.11.2008 leaving behind his legal heirs
viz., 1.Durai, 2. Banu, 3. Mani, 4. M.Karthikeyan, 4. Kavitha,
5.S.Tamilselvi and S.Sathikumar, who are already on record as Respondents
2,6 to 10 in the above appeal. The said Memo is recorded.
2. Further, Mr.R.Prabhakar the learned counsel appearing for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001
respondents 2, 6 to 8 in A.S.No.1017 of 2001 filed a Memo dated
02.07.2015 stating that the first respondent namely Dakshinamurthy passed
away on 19.11.2008 leaving behind his legal heirs viz., 1.Durai, 2. Banu, 3.
Mani, 4. M.Karthikeyan, 4. Kavitha, 5.S.Tamilselvi, and S.Sathikumar,
who are already on record as Respondents 2,6 to 8 in the above appeal. The
said Memo is recorded.
3. The learned counsel appearing on either side submitted that the
matter has been settled between the parties and a Memo of compromise
dated 09.04.2021 has been filed to that effect, which reads as under:
"1.The appellant filed O.S.No.3907
of 1998 on the file of 6th Additional City
Civil Court for partition. But appellant
was in possession of that portion so the
respondents filed O.S.No.7373 of 1988 for
recovery of possession of the very same
property. Both suits were tried together.
The suit filed by the appellant was
dismissed and the suit filed by the
respondent was decreed. So the appellant
filed A.S.No.783 of 2001 and A.S.No.1017
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001
of 2001 on the file of this Court.
2.Pending appeal the matter was
referred to mediation. In the mediation
the appellant accepted to pay
Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty
Lakhs only) to the respondents as per their
demand and the respondents further
accepts the title of the appellant/defendant
in O.S.No.7373 of 1988 and accepts the
exclusive the possession of the appellant.
3. Accordingly a sum of
Rs.1,15,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore
Fifteen Lakhs only) has already been paid
by the appellant, when the matter was
listed before his Lordship Mr.Justice
S.Sunder. At that time appellant offered to
pay balance sum of Rs.35,00,000/- (Rupees
Thirty Five Lakhs only) towards balance
sum on or before 30.04.2021. To prove his
bonafide the appellant paid a sum of
Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) by
way of two Demand Drafts on 17.12.2020.
Now the appellant is paying final sum of
Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001
only) By way of two DD's Bearing
No.949182 dated 01.02.2021 for
Rs.2,50,000/- and another D.D. bearing
No.949047 dated 12.01.2021 for
Rs.22,50,000/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs
Fifty Thousand Only) drawn on State
Bank of India, Ashok Nagar Branch.
4.The respondent accepts that appellant
has paid entire sale consideration as
demanded by them. Hence the
respondents has no objection for allowing
both the appeals and setting aside the
decrees of the trial Court. The
respondents further undertakes to close
the E.P. pending before the executing
Court. The respondents further submit
that they have no objection for receiving
the original title document marked as
Ex.A1 to A5 by the appellant before this
Court.
Therefore, it is prayed that this
Hon'ble Court may be pleased to record
this Memo and pass the decree in favour
of the appellant and thus render justice."
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001
Recording the said Memo of Compromise dated 09.04.2021 these
appeals are decreed in terms of Joint Memo of Compromise. The Joint
Memo of Compromise shall form part of the decree. No costs.
19.04.2021
Index: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
arr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
arr
To
The VI Additional City Civil Court,
Chennai.
A.S.Nos.783 & 1017 of 2001
19.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
