Madras High Court
B.Anandan vs B.Manoharan on 7 October, 2021
A.S.(MD)No.253 of 2008
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED :07.10.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. BHARATHIDASAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
A.S.(MD) No.253 of 2008
and
M.P.(MD) No. 1 of 2013 & M.P.(MD) No. 2 of 2014
and
CROS.OBJ(MD)No.13 of 2017
B.Anandan ... Appellant
-vs-
1. B.Manoharan
2. B.Prabaharan
3. B.Vasanthakumari
4. B.Vijayakumari
5. A.Renuga Devi
6. S.Megala Rani
7. K.Rajasekaran
8. L.Abimannan
9. R.Sathyanarayanan
(Respondents 7 to 9 are impleaded,
vide Court order dated 27.11.2017
made in M.P(MD) No.1 of 2014
by MKKSJ & VBSJ) ... Respondents
PRAYER : Appeal Suit is filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure
Code, to set aside the Judgment and Decree of the learned Additional
District Judge,(FTC No.1), Tirunelveli passed in O.S.No.6 of 2006
dated 25.05.2008 and allow this appeal with cost.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S.(MD)No.253 of 2008
For Appellant : Mr.A.Arumugam
For M/s.Ajmal Associates
For R1 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan
For R2 : Mr.P.Thiagarajan
For R3 & R4 : Mr.H.Arumugam
For R5 & R6 : Mr.M.V.Venkataseshan
For R7 & R8 : Mr.D.Nallathambi
For R9 : Mr.R.T.Arivukumar
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by V.BHARATHIDASAN, J.)
The appeal in A.S(MD)No.253 of 2008, has been filed by the
plaintiff against the dismissal of the Suit for partition in O.S.No.6 of
2006, on the file of learned Additional District Judge (FTC No.1),
Tirunelveli.
2. The Cross Objection has been filed by the defendants 3 to 5,
who have claimed 1/7th share in the suit schedule property, which was
also negatived by the trial Court.
3. Pending appeal, the appellant / plaintiff wants to withdraw
the appeal and also filed a memo to that effect.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S.(MD)No.253 of 2008
4. However, Mr.H.Arumugam, the learned counsel appearing for
the cross-objectors submitted that even though the plaintiff wants to
withdraw the suit, since they have also claiming right in the suit
schedule property, which was negative by the trial Court, they are not
willing to withdraw the appeal and they want to continuing the cross
objection.
5. Considering the submissions, even if the the appellant /
plaintiff wants to withdraw the suit, the cross objectors can still
maintain the cross-objection, they can be permitted to pursue the
same. In the said circumstances, the appeal in A.S.(MD)No.253 of
2008, alone is dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, the connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed. The Cros.Obj(MD)No.13 of 2017
is retained.
6. Since notice was not served on some of the respondents, the
cross-objectors are directed to take fresh notice to the respondents
also permitted to serve notice to the learned counsel appearing for
the available respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S.(MD)No.253 of 2008
7. Registry is directed to retain all the appeal papers along with
the records, and to be tagged with the Cros.Obj(MD)No.13 of 2017)
8. Post the Cross Objection for hearing on 30.11.2021.
[V.B.D.,J.] [J.N.B.,J.]
07.10.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
ebsi/mpk
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S.(MD)No.253 of 2008
To
1.The Additional District Judge,
(FTC No.1)
Tirunelveli.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S.(MD)No.253 of 2008
V.BHARATHIDASAN, J.
and
J.NISHA BANU, J.
MPK
ORDER MADE IN
A.S.(MD) No.253 of 2008
and
M.P.(MD) No. 1 of 2013 &
M.P.(MD) No. 2 of 2014
and
CROS.OBJ(MD)No.13 of 2017
07.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
