Madras High Court
Indira Gandhi vs Valli @ Villammal on 7 July, 2021
S.A.No.125 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
S.A.No.125 of 2015
and
M.P.No.1 of 2015
Indira Gandhi ... Appellant
Vs.
Pachai Ammal (Deceased)
1.Valli @ Villammal
2.Rani
3.Senthil
4.Raju (Died)
5.R.Vijaya
6.R.Mohana
7.R.Mageswari
(RR5 to RR7 brought on record as LRs of the
deceased R4 viz., Raju vide order of court dated
10/01/2020 made in CMP.No.26494 of 2019
in SA.No.125 of 2015 by MKKSJ) ... Respondents
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the
Judgment and Decree dated 19.09.2014 made in A.S.No.65 of 2007 on
the file of Sub Court, Kallakurichi reversing the Judgment and Decree
dated 24.04.2007 made in O.S.No.962 of 2004 on the file of Principal
District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi.
For Appellant : Mr.G.Surya Narayanan
For R1 to R3 : Mr.N.Ishtian Ahmed
For R4 to R6 : Mr.N.Manokaran
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 1 of 6
S.A.No.125 of 2015
JUDGMENT
This Second Appeal is directed against the impugned Judgment
and Decree dated 19.09.2014 passed by the Subordinate Court,
Kallakuruchi (hereinafter referred to as First Appellate Court) in
A.S.No.65 of 2007.
2. By the impugned Judgment and Decree, the First Appellate
Court has reversed the Judgment and Decree dated 24.04.2007 passed by
the Principal District Munsif Court, Kallakuruchi (hereinafter referred to
as Trial Court) in O.S.No.962 of 2004.
3. The appellant was the plaintiff in O.S.No.962 of 2004. The Trial
Court had partly decreed the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff by
allowing partition of Item No.1 of the Suit Schedule Properties.
Aggrieved by the same, the fourth respondent (fourth defendant) who
had purchased Item No.1 of the Suit Schedule Property filed A.S.No.65
of 2007 before the First Appellate Court. The First Appellate Court has
by the impugned Judgment and Decree reversed the decision of the Trial
Court in entirety. Therefore, the present Second Appeal has been filed.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 2 of 6
S.A.No.125 of 2015
4. This Second Appeal was admitted on 03.03.2015 on the
following substantial questions of law:-
i. Whether the lower appellate court was right in
holding that the defendants have proved the Will
said to have been executed by the father of the
plaintiff?
ii. Whether the lower appellate court was right in
ignoring the fact that there is no mention about the
Will in the sale deed executed by the defendants 1
to 3 in favour of the defendant 4?
iii. Whether the lower appellate court was right in
ignoring the material facts that had it been true that
the defendant 3 had become the owner by virtue of
the Will executed by the father of the plaintiff, there
would have been no necessity for the defendants 1
and 2 to have joined in the execution of the same
deed? and
iv. Whether the lower appellate court was right in
rejecting the case of the plaintiff?
5. The respective counsels on either side are present and have
made their submissions.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the First
Appellate Court committed error in setting aside the Judgment and
Decree dated 24.04.2007 of the Trial Court in entirety in as much as the
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 3 of 6
S.A.No.125 of 2015
appeal of the fourth respondent/fourth defendant was only confined to
Item No:1 of the Suit Schedule Property. He submits that since the First
Appellate Court has set aside the Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court
in entirety though the Appeal Suit was confined to Item No:1 of the Suit
Schedule Property, the appellant will be satisfied if there is clarification
that the impugned Judgment and Decree is operable to Item No.1 of the
Suit Schedule Property.
7. Considering the above submissions of the learned counsel for
the appellant, it is very clarified that the impugned Judgment and Decree
dated 19.09.2014 passed by the First Appellate Court in A.S.No.65 of
2007 shall be confined to Item No.1 of the Suit Schedule Property,
namely, the land in S.No.30/1C, S.Naraiyoor Village, Sirumpakkam Sub
Registration District, Kallakuruchi Registration District, measuring to an
extent of 1.15 Cents.
8. The impugned Judgment and Decree of the First Appellate Court
setting aside the Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court in its entirety is
therefore modified as above and the impugned Judgment and Decree
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 4 of 6
S.A.No.125 of 2015
passed by the First Appellate Court in so far as Item No:1 of the suit
schedule properties is confirmed.
9.Thus, this Second Appeal stands dismissed with the above
direction. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
07.07.2021
drl/jen
Internet : Yes / No
Index : Yes/No
To:
1.The Sub Court,
Kallakurichi
2.The Principal District Munsif Court,
Kallakurichi.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 5 of 6
S.A.No.125 of 2015
C.SARAVANAN, J.
drl/jen
S.A.No.125 of 2015
and
M.P.No.1 of 2015
07.07.2021
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 6 of 6
