Madras High Court
Kokilambalthanu vs Mrs.Vasanti Neelakantan on 10 August, 2021
C.S.No.156 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.08.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE
C.S.No.156 of 2016
& A.Nos.2722 & 2723 of 2021
KokilambalThanu ... Plaintiff
Vs.
1.Mrs.Vasanti Neelakantan
2.Ms.Radha Neelakantan
3.Ms.Usha Neelakantan
4.Ms.Vidya Neelakantan
5.Brilliant Tutorials P.Ltd,
It is rep by Managing Director,
Mrs.Vasanti Neelakandan,
No.12, Masilamani Street,
T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.
6.Central Bank of India,
Asset Recovery Branch,
48/49, Montieth Road,
Egmore, Chennai - 600 008,
Rep by its Asst. General Manager.
7.M/s.Bhoomi & Buildings Pvt. Ltd.
Rep by its Managing Director,
Mr.A.Sundar,
No.6, Padmanabha Nagar 2nd Street,
Adayar, Chennai - 600 020.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
C.S.No.156 of 2016
8.Mr.Mohammed Zaid ... Defendants
PRAYER : Civil Suit filed under Order VII Rule I of the Code of Civil
Procedure read with Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules, High
Court, Madras:
a) for a declaration declaring that the Release Deed dated
06.01.2011 registered as Document No.92 of 2011 on
the file of the Sub-Registrar of Assurances, Periamet as
null and void since the same was registered
fraudulently by the 1st Defendant
b) for a declaration declaring that the alleged mortgage
dated 26th August 2013 executed by the 1st defendant
in favour of the 6th defendnat and registered as
Document No.2009/13 on the file of the Sub-Registrar
of Assurances, Thiyagaraya Nagar as null and void
since the registration was done fraudulently,
c) pass a preliminary decree for partition according to
Hindu Succession Act embracing all legitimate
successors to the estate of Late Mr.Neelakandan and
separate possession of the same by metes and bonds or
otherwise, in respect of the schedule C,D,E & F of the
suit properties.
d) For a declaration declaring that the alleged sale dated
26.07.2012 in respect of the schedule A property
executed by the 1st defendant in favour of the 7th
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/7
C.S.No.156 of 2016
defendant registered as Document No.1728 of 2012 on
the file of the Sub-Registrar as null and void, non est
and not binding on the plaintiff
e) For a declaration declaring that the alleged sale dated
25.06.2012 in respect of the Schedule B property
executed by the 1st defendant in favour of the 7th
defendant registered as Document No.1476 of 2012 on
the file of the Sub-Registrar as null and void, non est
and not binding on the plaintiff
f) For a declaration declaring that the alleged sale dated
16.10.2012 in respect of the schedule G property
executed by the 1st defendant in favour of the 8th
defendant registered as Document No.5696 of 2012 on
the file of the Sub-Registrar as null and void, non est
and not binding on the plaintiff
g) For permanent injunction restraining the defendants or
their men, agents, servants, or any one acting through
from creating any encumbrance over the suit schedule
mentioned properties by way of sale, mortgage, lease
etc.,
h) to award costs and to pass such further or other orders
as it may deem fit and propoer in the facts and
circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
i) Liberty to reserved to the plaintiff to apply for final
decree for partition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/7
C.S.No.156 of 2016
For Plaintiff : Mr.A.V.Arun
For D6 : Mr.M.L.Ganesh
For D7 & D8 : Mr.A.Thayaparan
JUDGMENT
The Applications in A.Nos.2722 and 2723 of 2021 are filed to set aside
the ex-parte order passed against the defendants 7 and 8, since they have
not filed their written statement.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the defendants 7 and 8 submitted
that the written statement have been filed.
3.Mr.A.V.Arun, the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff would
submit that there is a certain property, which originally belonged to the
husband of the plaintiff, that they had a son, that on his demise the
property devolved equally on the plaintiff, his widow and his son, that
subsequently the son too died and his right devolved again on the son's
widow and children as well as the plaintiff, that the plaintiff has executed
a release deed as concerning her share over the property in favour of her
daughter-in-law and grandchildren, that the daughter-in-law and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.156 of 2016
grandchildren have later mordgaged the property to a bank and when the
bank initiated action for recovery of the morgaged money, this suit came
to be laid by the plaintiff challenging the release deed executed by the
plaintiff in favour of her daughter-in-law and grandchildren.
4.The learned counsel further added that the mother in law is now dead
and her heirs are the defendants.
5.The learned counsel for the sixth defendant would submit that the
property has already been sold under the SARFAESI Act.
6.Plainly, nothing survives to be considered in the suit and the same is
dismissed as infructuous. Since the suit has been dismissed as
infructuous, the Applications in A.Nos.2722 and 2723 of 2021 are
closed. No costs.
10.08.2021
Tsg
Index : Yes / No
Speaking Order / Non-speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.156 of 2016
N.SESHASAYEE.J.,
Tsg
C.S.No.156 of 2016
& A.Nos.2722 & 2723 of 2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.156 of 2016
10.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
