Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 17999 Mad
Judgement Date : 2 September, 2021
Rev.Pet.(MD).No.88 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.09.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
Rev.Aplc.(MD).No.88 of 2021
1.S.Muniyammal
2.Kumaresan ...Review petitioner/Appellants1 and 2
Vs.
1.Rakkammal ...1st Respondent/1st Respondent
2.The Tahsildar,
Thiruchuli Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
3.The District Collector,
District Collectorate,
Virudhunagar District.
4.The Superintendent of Police,
Superintendent Office,
Virudhunagar District. ...Respondents/Respondent 2 to 4
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Pet.(MD).No.88 of 2021
PRAYER: Review Petition filed under Order 47 Rule 1 and 2 read
with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment
and Decree passed in S.A.No.(MD).211 of 2019 dated 27.11.2019
passed by this Court.
For Appellants : Mr.S.Suresh Kumar Issac Paul
For Respondents : Mr.S. Parthasarathy for R1
ORDER
After the delay was condoned both the learned counsels have
submitted their arguments on the Review Application.
2.This Review Application has been filed seeking review of the
Judgment and Decree of this Court dated 27.11.2019 which is a
Judgment passed on the basis of the Joint Memorandum of
Compromise signed by both the parties and filed into Court. The
recording of the Compromise was done in the presence of the parties
who had admitted that they have signed the Compromise Memo on
their own will and volition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Rev.Pet.(MD).No.88 of 2021
3.The Review Application is filed on the ground that the Court
has failed to consider the request of the appellant to endorse a No
Objection by the respondents to the appellant for a compassionate
appointment for the post of the deceased as there is no rival claim in
respect of the said post.
4.The Review Petition does not make out any error apparent on
the face of the Judgment warranting its review. The Judgment in
S.A.No.(MD).211 of 2019 has been passed only on the basis of the
Joint Memorandum of Compromise in which the parties have set out in
detail their terms of Agreement.
In the light of the 1st term of the Memorandum of Compromise
that the appellants and the 1st respondent are hereby agreeing to pass a
Decree declaring that the 1st respondent alone as the legal heir of the
deceased Muneeswaran and agree that the Legalheirship Certificate
Ex.A.5 dated 05.03.2014 is null and void, the present claim of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Rev.Pet.(MD).No.88 of 2021
petitioner is without any basis. The Review Petitioner having
categorically agreed that only the 1st respondent Rakkammal is the legal
representative of the deceased Muneeswaran cannot turn around and
now state that they are entitled to compassionate appointment as legal
representative of the deceased Muneeswaran. The Review Petition is
totally misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
02.09.2021
Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No mps
To
1.The Tahsildar, Thiruchuli Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
2.The District Collector, District Collectorate, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Superintendent Office, Virudhunagar District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Rev.Pet.(MD).No.88 of 2021
P.T. ASHA, J,
mps
Rev.Aplc.(MD).No.88 of 2021
02.09.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!