Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 24085 Mad
Judgement Date : 7 December, 2021
S.A(MD)No.1122 of 2009
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 07.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
S.A(MD)No.1122 of 2009
and
C.M.P(MD)No.1135 of 2020
M.P.Ramasamy ... Appellant
Vs.
S.Charles Chandrasekar,
Rep. by its Power Agent,
Ms.Alphonsa Royan,
W/o. Lovelyn Royan,
Veerapandianpattinam,
Thiruchendur Taluk. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, against the Judgment and Decree dated 30.04.2009
in A.S.No.45 of 2005 on the file of the Sub Court, Tuticorin, confirming
the judgment and decree dated 06.10.2004 passed in O.S.No.224 of
2003 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Tuticorin.
For Appellant : Mr.R.J.Karthick
For Respondent : Ms.P.Jessi Jeeva Priya
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A(MD)No.1122 of 2009
JUDGMENT
The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.224 of 2003 on the
file of the Additional District Munsif, Thoothukudi, for return of the
document, which is in the nature of agreement to sell the property,
under which, the land owner has handed over the original document to
the agreement holder, namely, the defendant. The trial Court as well as
the first Appellate Court have given a finding that the
appellant/defendant is holding the original document of the disputed
property illegally and he has to return the same.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that
as per the said findings, the appellant/defendant had returned the said
document before the Execution Court on 27.08.2021 and hence, the
prayer sought for in the plaint has been complied with and accordingly,
the Second Appeal has become infructuous. The learned counsel
further submitted that the defendant had filed another suit in
O.S.No.12 of 2007 before the Sub-Court, Tuticorin, for the relief of
specific performance.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis S.A(MD)No.1122 of 2009
3.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/plaintiff also
agreed that the appellant had returned the original document on
27.08.2021.
4.Recording the submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing on either side, the Second Appeal stands dismissed as
infructuous. However, regarding the claim made by the appellant that
he has filed another suit in O.S.No.12 of 2007 before the Sub-Court,
Tuticorin, for the relief of specific performance, it is open to the parties
to contest the same on its own merits. No costs. Consequently,
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
07.12.2021 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No
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.1122 of 2009
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.
ps
To
1.The The Subordinate Court, Tuticorin.
2.The Additional District Munsif, Tuticorin.
3.The Record Keeper, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Judgment made in S.A(MD)No.1122 of 2009
07.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!