Madras High Court
P.Shanmugavel vs Ramakrishnan on 30 April, 2021
S.A.(MD)No.521 of 2011
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 30.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
S.A.(MD)No.521 of 2011
and
M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.335 of 2017
P.Shanmugavel ... Appellant
Vs.
Ramakrishnan ... Respondent
Prayer : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code,
against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.23 of 2010 on the file of the Sub
Court, Ambasamudhiram, Tirunelveli District dated 09.06.2011 reversing the
judgment and decree in O.S.No.274 of 2007 on the file of the District Munsif
Court, Ambasamudhiram, Tirunelveli District, dated 12.10.2009.
For Appellant : Mr.H.Arumugam
For Respondent : Mr.D.Nallathambi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/4
S.A.(MD)No.521 of 2011
JUDGEMENT
The defendant in O.S.No.274 of 2007 on the file of District Munsif
Court, Ambasamudhiram, is the appellant in this second appeal. The said suit
was filed by the respondent herein for recovery of rental arrears. The suit was
originally dismissed but the appeal filed by the plaintiff was allowed and the
suit came to be decreed. The appellant had been directed to pay a sum of Rs.
500/- as monthly rent. Even according to the plaintiff, only vacant site was let
out in favour of the appellant.
2.The second appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions
of law:-
“(i) Whether the unregistered document can be construed
as a valid peace of evidence? and
(ii) Whether the plaintiff is without filing Order 1 Rule 8
petition can represent the case on behalf of a group of people
attached to a temple”
3.Even though the learned counsel appearing for the appellant was ready
to get along with the matter on merits, I suggested to the learned counsel on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
S.A.(MD)No.521 of 2011
either side that since a subsequent suit has been filed in O.S.No.16 of 2018 on
the file of the District Munsif Court, Ambasamudhiram, for recovery of
possession from the appellant, all the issues can be left open even though I may
confirm the decree. The suggestion given by the Court was acceptable to both
the parties. Therefore, the impugned judgment and decree is confirmed.
However, I make it clear that all the outstanding issues raised by the appellant
are left open. In other words, confirming the impugned judgment and decree
will not cast any shadow on the appellant's defence in the subsequent
comprehensive suit filed in O.S.No.16 of 2018 on the file District Munsif
Court, Ambasamudhiram. I make it clear that the finding regarding title as well
as the validity of the suit document will be decided independently in O.S.No.16
of 2018 and the outcome of these proceedings will not govern the fate of the
subsequent suit. In other words, the parties will fight out the matter on a clean
slate. The second appeal is disposed of on these terms. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
30.04.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
ias
Note :In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is
presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the
advocate/litigant concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
S.A.(MD)No.521 of 2011
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
ias
To:
1.The Sub Court,
Ambasamudhiram,
Tirunelveli District .
2.The District Munsif Court,
Ambasamudhiram,
Tirunelveli District .
3.The Record Keeper,
V.R. Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
S.A.(MD)No.521 of 2011
30.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
