Madras High Court
Malliga Ammal vs Ambujam Ammal on 24 August, 2021
S.A.No.424 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.08.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
S.A.No.424 of 2012
Malliga Ammal ... Appellant
Vs.
1. Ambujam Ammal
2. Kalanjinatha Padayachi
3. Ramanuja Padayachi
4. Saroja Ammal ... Respondents
PRAYER: The Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Civil
Procedure Code to set aside the judgment and decree of the learned Additional
District Judge, Fast Track Court, Ariyalur, passed in A.S.No.133 of 2008 dated
11.04.2011 confirming the judgment and decree of the learned District Munsif,
Jayankondam, passed in O.S.No.393 of 1994 dated 13.09.2004.
For Appellant : M/s.J.Antony Jesus
For Respondents : M/s.U.Vinoth Kumar
-----
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
S.A.No.424 of 2012
JUDGMENT
Today when the matter is taken up, the learned counsel for both the
sides appeared online and submitted that the matter has been settled between
the parties and a Joint Memo of Compromise dated 18.08.2021 has also been
filed. The Joint Memo of Compromise is extracted as follows:-
“JOINT MEMO OF COMPROMISE
The appellant and the respondents humbly submits as follows:-
1. The appellant submits that she purchased the property
measuring to an extent of 1 Acre & 34 Cents bearing S.No.147/5 situated
in Variyankaval Village, Variyankaval Village, formerly Udayarpalayam
Taluk, presently Andimadam Taluk, Ariyalur District from one
Mr.Natarajan son of Kumarasamy Mudaliar through the registered sale
deed dated 07.05.1994 executed before the Udayarpalayam SRO and she
had become the absolute owner of the property.
2. The appellant submit that she got patta for the said property
vide patta No.469 of Variyankaval Village, formerly Udayarpalayam
Taluk, presently Andimadam Taluk, Ariyalur District and doing
agriculture in the said land.
3. The appellant submit that in the south east of the said
property, a small shed (10 feet * 8 feet) was built by the appellant in the
adjacent land bearing S.No.148/1 poramboke land. In the said shed the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
S.A.No.424 of 2012
watchman was resided and guarded the agricultural land.
4. The appellant submit that in the year 1994, there was a
misunderstanding between the appellants and the respondents about the
usage of the shed constructed in the above said poramboke land bearing
S.No.148/1 and hence the appellants filed a suit vide O.S.No.393 of 1994
before the Hon'ble District Munsif, Jeyankondam against the respondents
prayed to declare the right of the appellant over the suit property and for
consequential permanent injunction restraining the respondents and their
men from interfering with the peaceful possession of this appellant. In the
said suit the said Hon'ble Court dismissed the suit on 13.09.2004.
5. The appellant submit that against the said dismissal order,
the appellant filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Additional District
Judge, Fast Track Court, Ariyalur and the said appeal also dismissed by
the Hon'ble Court on 14.04.2011.
6. The appellant submit that against the said dismissal order of
the Appeal suit, the appellant filed an second appeal before this Hon'ble
High Court.
7. During the pendency of the said second appeal, at the
intervention of the well wishers, friends, village elders of both the families
there is a compromise between the appellant and the respondents and as
such they have agreed to settle the matter among themselves.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
S.A.No.424 of 2012
8. The Terms of Compromise are as follows:
(i) The Respondents do hereby confirmed that the respondent will
not disturb the entry of the appellant to his agricultural land
through the poramboke land bearing S.No.148/1 from the
main Road.
(ii) The Respondents do hereby agree that they removed the shed
in the poramboke land bearing S.No.148/1 and will not
disturb the peaceful possession of the plaintiff in respect of his
property an extent of 1 Acre & 34 Cents bearing S.No.147/5
situated in Variyankaval Village, Variyankaval Village,
formerly Udayarpalayam Taluk, presently Andimadam Taluk,
Ariyalur District and relinquish our right of possession to the
appellant.
(iii) The Appellant do hereby agree that they will look after the
expenses incurred for the removal of the shed by the
respondents in the poramboke and bearing S.No.148/1.
(iv) The respondents do hereby confirms that they agreed that the
appeal shall be disposed of as per this compromise between
memo and they will not press the decree 13.09.2004 passed
in O.S.No.393 of 1994 by the Hon'ble District Munsif,
Jeyankondam.
(v) The parties viz., the appellant and all the respondents hereto
agree that the above appeal may be disposed of by recording
this compromise.
(vi) The parties shall bear the respective costs.
Hence, the appellant and the respondents therefore prayed
that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dispose this second appeal
S.A.No.424 of 2012 by recording this memo of compromise and thus
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
S.A.No.424 of 2012
render justice.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
S.A.No.424 of 2012
The aforesaid Joint Memo of Compromise is taken on file and the
terms of Joint Memo shall form part of the judgment. The Second Appeal is
disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo of Compromise. There shall be no
order as to costs.
24.08.2021
asi
To
1. The Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Ariyalur.
2. The District Munsif, Jayankondam.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
S.A.No.424 of 2012
M. GOVINDARAJ, J
asi
S.A.No.424 of 2012
24.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
