Madras High Court
Joseph Saverirajan vs Edward Raj (Died) on 22 September, 2021
S.A.(MD)No.1053 of 2011
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 22.09.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
S.A.(MD)No.1053 of 2011
Joseph Saverirajan ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Edward Raj (Died)
2.Willaim Raj
3.Suresh Abrahamraj
4.Sakila
5.Sujatha
6.Thangam
7.Sobhana ... Respondents
(Respondents 3 to 7 are brought on record as
LRs of the deceased first respondent vide order
dated 23.08.2011 made in C.M.P.(MD)Nos.7802
and 7803 of 2005 in S.A.(MD)No.SR84188 of
2003 by MDJ)
Prayer : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code,
against the judgment and decree dated 13.08.1996 passed in A.S.No.194 of
1994 on the file of the II Additional District Court, Tirunelveli, reversing the
judgment and decree dated 18.09.1990 passed in O.S.No.251 of 1989 on the
file of the learned Principal Subordinate Court, Tirunelveli.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/4
S.A.(MD)No.1053 of 2011
For Appellant : Mr.S.Parthasarathy
For Mr.K.Pectchi Muthu
For Respondents : Mr.K.Rajeswaran for R2
Mr.Sreemumaran Nair for R7
JUDGEMENT
The plaintiff in O.S.No.194 of 1989 on the file of the Principal Sub
Court, Tirunelveli is the appellant in this second appeal. The suit was filed for
declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the suit property. The suit
property measures an extent of 94 cents. The defendants had staked rival claim
in respect 25 cents of land therein. The trial Court decreed the suit as prayed
for. Aggrieved by the same, the defendants filed A.S.No.194 of 1994 before the
II Additional District Court, Tirunelveli. The first appellate Court by the
impugned judgment and decree dated 13.08.1996 allowed the appeal and
reversed the decision of the trial Court and the suit was dismissed. Challenging
the same, the plaintiff filed this second appeal.
2.During the pendency of the second appeal, the first respondent passed
away and his legal representatives namely, the respondents 3 to 7 were brought
on record. During the pendency of the second appeal, the legal representatives
of the deceased first respondent parted their interest in the said 25 cents of land
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
S.A.(MD)No.1053 of 2011
in favour of the second respondent vide registered document dated 21.01.2014
bearing document No.155 of 2014 registered on the file of the Sub Registrar,
Edalakudy. Hence, the contest was only between the appellant and the second
respondent herein. Whileso, on 08.09.2021, the second respondent/William Raj
had sold the disputed portion of the land in favour of the appellant vide
registered sale deed dated 08.09.2021. The learned counsel for the appellant
has filed a memo dated 22.09.2021 in this regard. The same is taken on record.
The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent on instructions states
that he has no objection for restoring the decision of the trial Court in view of
the subsequent developments set out in the memo dated 22.09.2021 filed by the
learned counsel for the appellant. The impugned judgment and decree passed
by the first appellate Court is set aside.
3.In view of the same, this second appeal is allowed and the judgment
and decree of the trial Court is restored. No costs.
22.09.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
ias
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/
S.A.(MD)No.1053 of 2011
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
ias
To:
1.The II Additional District Court,
Tirunelveli.
2.The Principal Sub Court,
Tirunelveli.
Copy to:
The Record Keeper,
V.R. Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
S.A.(MD)No.1053 of 2011
22.09.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
