Madras High Court
Sundarraj vs Muthunayakam on 23 December, 2021
S.A.Nos.530 and 531 of 2006
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 23.12.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
S.A.Nos.530 and 531 of 2006
and
M.P.No.1 of 2006 in S.A.No.530 of 2006
S.A.No.530 of 2006:
Sundarraj ... Appellant/
Appellant/Plaintiff
Vs.
Muthunayakam ... Respondent/
Respondent/Defendant
PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil
Procedure Code, against the decree and judgment passed in A.S.No.116
of 2004 on the file of the Sub Judge, Padmanabhapuram, dated
05.10.2005 confirming the decree and judgment in O.S.No.52 of 2004
passed by the Additional District Munsif, Padmanabhapuram dated
21.07.2004.
For Appellant : Mrs.J.Anandhavalli
For Respondent : Mr.V.M.Balamohan Thambi
S.A.No.531 of 2006:
Sundarraj ... Appellant/
Appellant/Defendant
Vs.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.Nos.530 and 531 of 2006
Muthunayakam ... Respondent/
Respondent/Plaintiff
PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil
Procedure Code, against the decree and judgment passed in A.S.No.115
of 2004 on the file of the Sub Judge, Padmanabhapuram, dated
05.10.2005 confirming the decree and judgment in O.S.No.50 of 2004
passed by the Additional District Munsif, Padmanabhapuram dated
21.07.2004.
For Appellant : Mrs.J.Anandhavalli
For Respondent : Mr.V.M.Balamohan Thambi
COMMON JUDGMENT
The defendant is the appellant in S.A.No.531 of 2006. The suit in
O.S.No.50 of 2004 was filed by the plaintiff for suit for specific
performance of a sale agreement, dated 28.12.1998. The suit was decreed
by the trial Court. The defendants have filed A.S.No.115 of 2004 and the
same was confirmed by the First Appellate Court. As against the same,
the present S.A.No.531 of 2006 has been filed.
2. Then the plaintiff in O.S.No.52 of 2004 is the appellant in
S.A.No.530 of 2006, which was filed seeking a prayer for declaration of
2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.Nos.530 and 531 of 2006
title and permanent injunction. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court
and confirmed in A.S.No.116 of 2004. As against the same, the present
S.A.No.530 has been filed.
3. The appellant and respondent are brothers. Due to the
intervention of the third party and family members, they have arrived at a
settlement and a Joint Memo Compromise has been filed by the parties.
The said Memo Compromise has been signed by the parties as well as
their respective counsels, along with a plan, which has also been signed
by the parties. Both the parties have appeared in person and they have
understood the terms of compromise and signed the Compromise Memo.
The Compromise Memo is recorded. The decree is passed in terms of the
said Joint Memo of compromise. The Compromise Memo and the plan
attached to the Compromise Memo shall form part of the compromise
decree. Both the Second Appeals are disposed of in the above said terms.
No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
23.12.2021
gbg
3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.Nos.530 and 531 of 2006
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.
To
1.The Sub Judge,
Padmanabhapuram.
2.The Additional District Munsif,
Padmanabhapuram.
3.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.Nos.530 and 531 of 2006
R.VIJAYAKUMAR ,J.
gbg
Order made in
S.A.Nos.530 and 531 of 2006
Dated:
23.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
