Sarojammal vs Dayala Naidu
2021 Latest Caselaw 1987 Mad

                                                                            C.M.A.No.3700 of 2012 and
                                                                                M.P.Nos.1&2 of 2012

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED : 29.01.2021

                                                       CORAM

                                   THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                               C.M.A.No.3700 of 2012 and
                                                 M.P.Nos.1&2 of 2012

                     1.Sarojammal

                     2.Lalithammal

                     3.Vasantha

                     4.Kuttiyammal @ Meera Bai                                    ... Appellants
                                                          Vs.

                     Dayala Naidu                                                 ... Respondent


                     Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 104 r/w order
                     XLIII Rule 1 of CPC, against the fair and decreetal order dated
                     09.03.2012 passed in I.A.No.77 of 2011 in O.S.No.22 of 2011 on the
                     file of the Principal District Judge, Thiruvallur.

                                     For Appellants    : Mr.N.R.Anantha Ramakrishnan

                                     For Respondent    : Mr.P.Valliyappan




                     1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                              C.M.A.No.3700 of 2012 and
                                                                                  M.P.Nos.1&2 of 2012

                                                    JUDGMENT

The fair and decreetal order 09.03.2012 passed in I.A.No.77 of

2011 in O.S.No.22 of 2011, is under challenge in the present appeal.

2. The plaintiffs are the appellants and the suit was instituted for

partition. The learned counsel for the appellants made a submission that

the negotiation was in progress in the process of settlement between the

parties. However, the same yielded no result. The learned counsel for the

appellants is of the opinion that an order of injunction was initially

granted. However, the same was vacated without valid reasons. In view

of the fact that the interim order was vacated by dismissal of the

interlocutory application, the appellants are constrained to move the

present appeal. Admittedly, the suit for partition is pending for the past

about nine years. The interim order granted in interlocutory application

was dismissed on 09.03.2012 and for the past about eight years, the

interim order was not in force.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.3700 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1&2 of 2012

3. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the

issues as there is no interim order was in force for about eight years and

the parties are at liberty to raise all their respective grounds and

adjudicate the suit on merits and in accordance with law.

4. In this view of the matter, the fair and decreetal order passed in

I.A.No.77 of 2011 in O.S.No.22 of 2011 stands confirmed.

Consequently, C.M.A.No.3700 of 2012 stands dismissed. However, the

Trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible

and preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a

copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous

petitions are closed.

5. The parties to the suit are directed to cooperate for the earlier

disposal of the suit. The Trial Court should decline unnecessary

adjournments on flimsy grounds if sought for by the parties to the suit.

The adjournments sought are to be granted only on genuine grounds and

by recording reasons. Thus, the Trial Court is expected to proceed with

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.3700 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1&2 of 2012

the case without granting any unnecessary adjournments either at the

instance of the parties or by the Courts.

29.01.2021 Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking Order gsk

To The Principal District Judge, Thiruvallur.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.3700 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1&2 of 2012

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

gsk

C.M.A.No.3700 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1&2 of 2012

29.01.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/