Madras High Court
D.Periathambi vs P.Kaliappan on 8 February, 2021
1 A.S.No.495 OF 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
A.S.No.495 of 2018
and
C.M.P.No.12827 of 2018
1.D.Periathambi
2.P.Janaki ...Appellants/
2 & 3 Defendants
Vs
1.P.Kaliappan
....Respondent/Plaintiff
2.C.Perumal ...Respondent/first defendant
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Section 96 of CPC to set aside the judgment
and decree in O.S.No.305 of 2013 dated 18.01.2018 on the file of the First
Additional District Judge, Salem.
For Appellants : No Appearance
For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Vijaya Raghavan for R1
Mr.M.Suresh Kumar for R2
JUDGMENT
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
This appeal is filed against the decree passed in the partition suit
pending since 2018.
2. In the previous occasion, when the matter was listed, there was no
representation on behalf of the appellant. The learned counsel, who filed
vakalat for the appellant reported that the party has taken bundle from him
by engaging a new counsel. Based on his representation, this Court directed
the learned counsel for the respondent to inform the appellant that the
matter will be taken up for final hearing today i.e., 08.02.2021. In
compliance with the said direction, the learned counsel for the respondent
has taken private notice through RPAD to the appellant. The postal tracking
record indicates that the cover was delivered to the first appellant on
05.02.2021 at 13:36:48 hours. The cover to the second appellant Janaki was
delivered to her on 04.02.2021 at 13:33:02 hours.
3. The suit filed on the premise that the first appellant herein misusing
the power of attorney given by his father Perumal, had transferred the
property in the name of his wife, the second appellant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
4.The case of the respondent herein, who is the plaintiff is that his
father Perumal settled 45.5 cents of the land on the northern portion to him
vide settlement deed dated 18.10.2002 marked as Ex.A1=Ex.A6. Whileso,
the power of attorney deed dated 17.04.2002 marked as Ex.A2 given in
favour of his younger son Periyathambi for the purpose of getting loan to
run a rice mill being refused by Periyathambi, the first appellant and he has
created a deed of transfer fraudulently in the name of his own wife. The
trial Court has accepted the case of the plaintiff and decreed the partition
deed.
5.After filing the appeal, the appellants have not shown any interest to
pursue the appeal. The Registry of High Court on 05.01.2021 received a
letter from the second respondent/first defendant, the father of the first
appellant Periyathambi and the first respondent, Kaliyappan/the plaintiff
requesting the Court to take up the matter at the earliest and dispose it of
during his life time. The letter received from 80 years old Perumal, who is
the father of the contesting parties reveals the anguish of the old man. He
has deposed before the trial court as DW1, which has been considered
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
VRI
before the trial court and the judgment has been rendered after due
discussion. Therefore, in view of the non participation of the appellants, the
appeal is dismissed for default. No order as to costs. The connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
08.02.2021
Speaking/Non Speaking
Index :Yes/No
vri
To
The First Additional District Judge,
Salem.
A.S.NO.495 of 2018
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
