Madras High Court
M.Ramakrishnan vs Ramasamy Nadar (Died) on 4 February, 2022
Review Application(MD).No.35 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 04.02.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
Review Application(MD).No.35 of 2021
in
S.A.(MD).No.1422 of 1996
M.Ramakrishnan ... Petitioner/Appellant
Vs.
1.Ramasamy Nadar (Died)
2.Ronickam
3.Chinna Nadar (Died)
4.Ammukutty
5.Gowri Amma (Died)
6.Gnanasoundari
7.Ambuross
8.Chellappan (Died)
9.Thangammal
10.C.Jalaja
11.C.Nisha
12.C.Nireesh
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Review Application(MD).No.35 of 2021
13.C.Nishanth
14.G.Sarojini
15.R.Kumaresan
16.R.Sulochnal
17.R.Ganesan
18.Sunderesan
19.C.Johnson
20.J.Aneesh
21.Muthamma
22.C.Vasanthakumari
23.Valsala
24.C.Kala
25.C.Arul Rajesh
26.C.Shoba
27.C.Amutha
28.Jeyaraj ... Respondents/Respondents
(R-28 impleaded vide Court Order dated 04.02.2022 in C.M.P.(MD).No.773 of
2022 in Review Application (MD).No.35 of 2021)
Prayer : Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1, read with Section
114 CPC, to review the judgment and decree passed by this Court in S.A.No.
1422 of 1996 dated 26.09.2018 by allowing this review petition.
2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Review Application(MD).No.35 of 2021
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Thirumahilmaran
For Respondents : R-1, R-3, R-5 and R-8 (died)
Mr.L.Shaji Chellan
for R-4, R-9 to R-11 and R-13 to R-28
ORDER
Heard Mr.P.Thirumahilmaran, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr.L.Shaji Chellan, learned counsel for the respondents 4, 9 to 11 and 13 to
2. Both the learned counsels affirmed that the parties had entered
into a compromise and that the Court should recognize such compromise as
having been entered into voluntarily by the parties. A joint compromise memo
dated 30.01.2022, had been presented before this Court.
3. In the compromise memo, the signatories have also enclosed
their Aadhaar cards and the same has also been identified. The joint
compromise memo shall form a part of this order in Review Application
(MD).No.35 of 2021 in S.A.(MD).No.1422 of 1996.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Review Application(MD).No.35 of 2021
4. The earlier order of dismissal of the Second Appeal in
S.A.(MD).No.1422 of 1996 dated 26.09.2018 is set aside, in view of the fact
that the Review Application is allowed and, S.A.(MD).No.1422 of 1996 is
allowed in terms of the joint compromise memo dated 30.01.2022. The joint
compromise memo shall form a part of the decree in S.A.(MD).No.1422 of
1996. No costs.
04.02.2022
(1/3)
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
Lm
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
Review Application(MD).No.35 of 2021
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
Lm
Review Application(MD).No.35 of 2021
in
S.A.(MD).No.1422 of 1996
04.02.2022
(1/3)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
