Murugesan vs Nallammal
2021 Latest Caselaw 10528 Mad

                                                                               S.A.No.1575 of 2011

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                              DATED :      23.04.2021

                                                       CORAM

                                     THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA

                                                 S.A.No.1575 of 2011


                     Murugesan                             ...   Appellant

                                                          Vs.

                     1.Nallammal
                     2.Velusamy
                     3.Shanmugam
                     4.Kalaimani
                     5.Muthusamy
                     6.Sarasu
                     7.Kaliammal
                     8.Pappe
                     9.Parvathi                           ...    Respondents

                     PRAYER:            Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of
                     Civil Procedure to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 28.10.2010
                     made in A.S.No.30 of 2008 on the file of the learned Principal District
                     Judge, Namakkal confirming the Judgment and Decree dated
                     23.08.2008 made in O.S.No.392 of 1996 on the file of the learned
                     Subordinate Judge, Namakkal.




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                S.A.No.1575 of 2011




                                        For Appellant      :   Mr.T.Dhanyakumar
                                        For Respondent :       Mr.M.Meenakshi for R4, R6 to R9


                                                         JUDGMENT

The parties to the proceedings in S.A.No.1575 of 2011 which

emanates from the suit O.S.No.392 of 1996 filed by the appellant

herein for a partition and separate possession of his 17/24th share in the

suit properties have compromised the disputes among themselves. The

connected suit O.S.No.25 of 1998 is filed by the appellant herein

against the respondents 5, 8 and 2 in S.A.No.15 of 2011 for a bare

injunction. The suit in O.S.No.392 of 1996 is a comprehensive suit.

2. The parties have entered into a joint memo of compromise in

which the suit schedule properties have been alloted to the various

sharers and the details of the allotment has been given in the joint

Memorandum of compromise.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ S.A.No.1575 of 2011

Therefore, the Joint Memorandum Compromise is recorded and

the Second Appeal is allowed in terms thereof. The Joint

Memorandum of Compromise along with the sketch detailing the

allotment of shares to the parties to the appeal will form part of the

Decree. There shall be no order as to costs.

                                                                                   23.04.2021


                     Index              : Yes/No
                     Internet           : Yes/No
                     mps

                     To

1.The Principal District Judge, Namakkal.

2.The Subordinate Judge, Namakkal.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ S.A.No.1575 of 2011

P.T. ASHA, J,

mps

S.A.No.1575 of 2011

23.04.2021

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