Madras High Court
S.Senthil Kumar vs N.Subramanian(Died) ... 1St on 16 June, 2021
1 S.A.(MD)NO.133 OF 2011
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 16.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
S.A.(MD)No.133 of 2011 and
M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011
S.Senthil Kumar ... Appellant/Appellant/
1st Defendant
Vs.
1. N.Subramanian(Died) ... 1st Respondent/1st Respondent/
Plaintiff
2. N.Kannan
3. Mahadevan
4. Jeyam ... Respondents 2 to 4/
Respondents 2 to 4/
Defendants 2 to 4
5. S.Chandra
6. S.Rajesh Kumar
7. S.Ramani
(R-5 to R-7 are brought on record as LRs of the deceased
1st respondent vide Order dated 27.09.2019
made in C.M.P.(MD)No.12 to 14 of 2019)
Prayer: Second appeal filed under Section 100 of
C.P.C., to set aside the Decree and Judgment dated
07.09.2010 rendered in A.S.No.60 of 2008 on the file of the I
Additional District Judge, Madurai, confirming the Decree and
Judgment dated 22.01.2008 passed in O.S.No.311 of 1998 on
the file of the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai, by
allowing this second appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
2 S.A.(MD)NO.133 OF 2011
For Appellant : Ms.P.Jessi Jeeva Priya,
for Mr.A.P.Athithan
For R-2 : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai
For R-4 : Mr.J.Ramamoorthy
For R-5 to R-7 : Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathy
For R-3 : No appearance.
***
JUDGMENT
The first defendant in O.S.No.311 of 1998 on the file
of the II Additional Sub Court, Madurai, is the appellant in this
second appeal.
2. The suit was filed by one Subramanian for ejecting
the appellant and three others. Even according to the
appellant, he was only a tenant under the original plaintiff.
The plaintiff issued Ex.A.2 termination of lease notice dated
22.07.1997. The same was also received by the father of the
appellant herein. The plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1 and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
3 S.A.(MD)NO.133 OF 2011
Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.8 were marked. The appellant examined himself
as D.W.1. No document was marked on his side. The learned
trial Judge by judgment and decree dated 22.01.2008 decreed
the suit as prayed for.
3. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed A.S.
No.60 of 2008 before the I Additional District Court, Madurai.
By judgment and decree dated 07.09.2010, the appeal was
dismissed. Challenging the same, this second appeal came to
be filed.
4. Though this appeal is of the year 2011, only notice
was ordered and it had not been admitted. The original
plaintiff has passed away and his legal heirs have come on
record. It appears that among the legal heirs of the plaintiff
and the other defendants partition proceedings are pending at
the second appeal stage. However, while partition proceedings
will have to be separately worked out, there appears to be
consensus among them that this second appeal has to be
dismissed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
4 S.A.(MD)NO.133 OF 2011
5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant
reiterated all the contentions set out in the memorandum of
grounds and called upon this Court to frame substantial
questions of law and thereafter take up the appeal for final
disposal.
6. This is a suit for ejectment. There is no dispute that
the suit property originally belonged to Narayana Iyer. The
plaintiff was the elder son, while defendants 2 and 3 are the
younger sons. The fourth defendant Jeyam was the daughter
of Narayana Iyer. Subramanian had passed away and his legal
heirs are shown as respondents 5 to 7. Even though the
original plaintiff was one of the co-owners of the suit property,
his competence to institute the suit for ejectment cannot be
disputed. In fact, the other defendants have sailed with the
original plaintiff in the matter of seeking ejectment against the
appellant herein. The suit was preceded by termination notice.
The Courts below have correctly held that the appellant has to
hand over the possession of the property in question. I do not
find any substantial question of law arising for consideration.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
5 S.A.(MD)NO.133 OF 2011
7. This second appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
17.06.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
PMU
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 I Additional District Judge,
Madurai.
2. The II Additional Subordinate Judge,
Madurai.
3. The Record Keeper, V.R.Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
6 S.A.(MD)NO.133 OF 2011
G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.
PMU
S.A.(MD)No.133 of 2011
16.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
