Madras High Court
Rethinathammal (Died) vs Sekar on 25 April, 2022
S.A.(MD)No.137 of 2010
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 25.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
S.A.(MD)No.137 of 2010
1.Rethinathammal (died)
2.Papammal (died)
3.Suyam Prakasam ... Appellants / Appellants / Plaintiffs
C.Nithyanantham (died) S/o.Rethinammal
C.Sathanantham (died) S/o.Rethinammal
4.R.Mangaiyarkarasi
5.Rathinakumar
6.Rajeswari
7.Saraswathi
8.S.Rajasekar
9.S.Chinnaraja ... Appellants
(Appellants 4 to 9 are suo motu impleaded as Lrs of the deceased
1st appellant vide order dated 04.04.2022)
T.Sakunthala (died)
10.M.Muruganantham
11.M.Anantharaman
12.M.Amirthavalli
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
S.A.(MD)No.137 of 2010
13.B.Dharumambal
14. M.Mohan
15.T.Anbu Velan
16.T.Anbu Ganesan
17.T.Anbumani
18.J.Rani @ Vijayakumari
19.C.Santhi ... Appellants
(Appellants 10 to 19 are suo motu impleaded as Lrs of the deceased
2nd appellant vide order dated 04.04.2022)
-Vs-
Sekar ... Respondent / Respondent / Defendant
PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure
Code, against the Judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.17 of 2005, dated
07.09.2006 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Thanjavur confirming the
decree and judgment of the District Munsif Court, Thiruvaiyaru in O.S.No.
198 of 2004, dated 16.11.2004.
For Appellants : Mr.V.K.Vijayaragavan
for Mr.M.R.S.Prabhu
For Respondent : Mrs.N.Krishnavei
Senior Counsel
for Mr.P.Thiagarajan
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/6
S.A.(MD)No.137 of 2010
JUDGMENT
This second appeal arises out of a suit for declaration and permanent
injunction. O.S.No.198 of 2004 filed by the original appellant suffered
dismissal by judgment and decree dated 16.11.2004. Aggrieved by the
same, they filed A.S.No.17 of 2005 before the Principal Sub Court,
Thanjavur. The first appellate court also dismissed the appeal and
confirmed the decision of the trial court by the impugned judgment and
decree dated 07.09.2006. Challenging the same, this second appeal came to
be filed. Though the second appeal was filed way back in the year 2010,
only notice was ordered and it has not been admitted till date. During the
pendency of the second appeal, the first and second appellants passed away
and their legal heirs have been brought on record.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the
learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents. The genealogy is as
under:-
Narayanasamy Pillai
Papammal Sivagami Ammal
(1st Wife) (2nd Wife)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.(MD)No.137 of 2010
Perumachi Ammal Sundarambal
W/o.Shanmugam
Shanmugam
Rathinambal Papammal Suyamprakasam Sundarambal Sivabackiyam Rajambal
(Pl No.1) (Pl.No.2) (PI No.3) (no issue) (no issue) Sekar
(Defendant)
3. The suit properties originally belonged to Narayanasamy Pillai. He
passed away in the year 1920 itself. He was originally married to one
Papammal. Following her demise, he got married to one Sivagami Ammal.
Sivagami Ammal passed away on 03.07.1981. The plaintiffs herein are
none other than the grand children of the first wife Papammal.
The respondent herein namely Sekar claims lineage through the second wife
Sivagami Ammal. The plaintiffs herein had originally filed the partition
suit in O.S.No.75 of 1981 on the file of the District Munsif Court,
Thiruvaiyaru. It was dismissed on 26.07.1985. A.S.No.88 of 1986 filed by
them was allowed by the District Court on 29.12.1987. Challenging the
same, S.A.No.403 of 1988 was filed and it was allowed on 25.01.2000.
The present plaintiffs thereafter filed Review Petition No.52 of 2000 and it
was dismissed on 05.09.2001. Thereafter, the present round litigation was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.(MD)No.137 of 2010
initiated. The courts below rightly came to the conclusion that since the
plaintiffs have already lost, the present round is hit by the vice of
re-litigation. There is nothing for this Court to interfere. No substantial
question of law arises for consideration.
4. I confirm the impugned judgment and decree and dismiss the
second appeal. Even before commencement of the argument, I wanted to
know if the issues can be resolved in view of the relationship between the
parties. I also directed the parties to go for mediation. Unfortunately, the
mediation could not succeed. The respondent however through the learned
senior counsel undertakes to deposit a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the credit of
O.S.No.198 of 2004 on the file of the District Musif Court, Thiruvaiyaru.
Three months time is given to make such deposit. The amount will remain
in court deposit for a period of nine months thereafter. It is open to the
appellants herein to join together and withdraw the entire amount towards
full and final settlement so that the matter is given a quietus. If even one
among the appellants is not willing to join, withdrawal will not be allowed.
If within the period mentioned above, the appellants fail to withdraw the
amount, it is open to the respondent herein to take it back.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.(MD)No.137 of 2010
G.R.SWAMINATHAN.J.,
rmi
5. With this direction to the respondent, the second appeal is
dismissed. No cost.
25.04.2022
Internet : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
rmi
To
1.The Principal Sub Court, Thanjavur.
2.The District Munsif Court, Thiruvaiyaru.
Copy To
The Section Officer,
Vernacular Records,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
Judgment made in
S.A.(MD)No.137 of 2010
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
