Madras High Court
K.Pandurangan vs Pushpaleela Soundarapandian on 3 March, 2022
C.S.No.375 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
C.S.No375 of 2021
and
A.Nos.279, 280 & 281 of 2022
&
O.A.Nos.840 & 841 of 2021
K.Pandurangan
S/o, Late.N.Krishnasamy ... Plaintiff
Vs.
1.
Pushpaleela Soundarapandian
W/o, Late.A.Soundarapandian
Rep. By her Power Agent
S.Suresh
S/o, Late.A.Soundarapandian
2. S.Suresh
S/o, Late.A.Soundarapandian
3. Sathi Thomas,
D/o, Late.A.Soundarapandian
Rep. By her Power Agent
S.Suresh
S/o, Late.A.Soundarapandian
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.375 of 2021
4. N.Ravindran
S/o, Late Naganathan
5. M/s.Luxebuilt Homes Pvt. Ltd,
Rep. By its Directors,
Lavanya Subramaniam &
M.N.Neelankantan
No.8, Lus Avenue,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
6. M/s.Vistra ITCL (India) Ltd.,
(Formerly known as IL & FS Trust Co. Ltd,
Rep by its Director,
Having its Branch Office at,
No.498, Karumuthu Centre,
3rd Floor, South Wing,
Anna Saslai,
Chennai – 600 035. ... Defendants
Prayer:
Civil Suit filed under Order IV, Rule 1 of O.S. Rules read with Order
VII Rule 1 of C.P.C.,1908, for a judgment and decree as against the
defendants as under:
(a) Directing the 4th defendant to specifically perform his duties and
obligations arising out of the Memorandum of Understanding dated
20.04.2010 entered into between the plaintiff and the 4th defendant herein in
respect of the suit schedule mentioned property, or in the alternative,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.375 of 2021
Direct division of the Schedule “A” mentioned property into two shares by
vertical division and allocate 50% of the constructed area together with 50%
undivided share of land in Schedule “A” property, morefully described in
the plaint “B” schedule property.
(b) For a declaration that the plaintiff has an equitable charge over
suit “A” schedule mentioned property by reason of the Memorandum of
Understanding dated 20.04.2010,
(c) Mandatory injunction directing the defendants 4 to 6 to clear all
the subsisting encumbrances created over the suit schedule “A” property by
way of Mortgage, Joint Development or otherwise on a day to be fixed by
this Court so as to enable the plaintiff to achieve the objects of the
Memorandum of Understanding entered into between the plaintiff and the
4th defendant dated 20.04.2010 in respect of the suit schedule “B”
mentioned property, without any let or hindrance,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.375 of 2021
(d) For a declaration that the purported Mortgage Deed dated
29.01.2019 and registered as Document No.5726 of 2019, joint-I Saidapet,
Chennai – South created by the 4th defendant acting through 5th defendant in
favour of the 6th defendant in respect of plaint “A” schedule property is
illegal, invalid, non-est in the eyes of law and consequently not binding
upon the plaintiff in respect of his 50% UDS in the land and 50% in the
total constructed area erected in Schedule “A” property morefully described
in the plaint “B” schedule property,
(e) Grant a decree for permanent injunction restraining the 6th
defendant, its officers, agents, servants or any other person or persons
claiming through them from in any manner by taking any coercive steps for
enforcement of the alleged Mortgage Deed dated 29.01.2019 and registered
as Document No.5726 of 2019 Joint-I Saidapet, Chennai – South purported
to have been created by the 4th defendant acting through the 5th defendant in
favour of 6th defendant in respect of Plaint “A” schedule mentioned property
except in accordance with Memorandum of Understanding dated
20.04.2010 entered into between the plaintiff and the 4th defendant in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.375 of 2021
respect of schedule “B” mentioned property forming part of Schedule “A”
property.
(f) Grant a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants
4 to 6, their men, agents, servants or any other person or persons claiming
through them from in any manner encumbering, alienating or dealing with
the suit Schedule “A” mentioned property including the constructed area
thereon morefully described in Schedule “B” property either divided or
undivided either in one lot or in pieces as the case may be except in
accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding dated 20.04.2010
entered into with the plaintiff and the 4th defendant.
(g) Grant such further or other reliefs
(h) Costs of the suit.
For Plaintiff : M/s.R.Thiagarajan
For D4 : M/s.Thanu Madhan.N.S
For D5 : M/s.AAV Partners
Anand David
For D6 :M/s.Tatva Legal Chennai
*****
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.375 of 2021
ORDER
The plaintiff has given up his claim against the defendants 1 to 4 and
6. Both the the plaintiff and fifth defendant entered into compromise and
they filed joint memo of compromise dated 03.03.2022.
2. Both the plaintiff and the representative of the fifth defendant
/Company, namely Mr.Sumanth Subramanian, one of the Directors of the
fifth defendant/Company are present before this Court and also accepted
that they have entered into a joint memo of compromise. They have signed
in the memorandum of compromise entered into between them and also
signed by their respective counsel.
3. The terms of joint memo of compromise are recorded. The suit is
decreed in term of the joint memo of compromise. No costs. The joint memo
of compromise shall form part and parcel of the decree. Consequently,
connected applications are closed.
03.03.2022
mfa
Index:yes/No
Internet:yes/No
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.375 of 2021
mfa
C.S.No375 of 2021
and
A.Nos.279, 280 & 281 of 2022
&
O.A.Nos.840 & 841 of 2021
03.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
