Supreme Supreme Corporation vs Kathirasan
2022 Latest Caselaw 6096 Mad

                                                                             A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012


                             BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                              DATED: 24.03.2022

                                                       CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
                                                         AND
                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
                                                A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012
                                                          and
                                               M.P(MD)No.1 of 2012 &
                                            C.M.P.(MD) No.2397 of 2022


                     1.Supreme Supreme Corporation,
                       rep. by its Partner Brij Rathan Bagari,
                       No.33, Venkatasala Muthali Theru,
                       Chennai - 3.
                     2.R.R.Bagari
                     3.Gushal Bagari                                     ... Appellants


                                                          Vs.
                     1.Kathirasan
                     2.Ismail
                     3.Roshan Banu Lalitha
                     4.K.Kasilingam


                     1/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                     A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012


                     5.K.Pal Selvi
                     (Respondents 4 and 5 are impleaded as party
                     respondent, vide order, dated 15.06.2012 made in
                     M.P.(MD) No.2 of 2012)
                     6. Tamilselvi
                     7.M.Rajagani
                     8.V.Shanthi
                     9.K.Nehru Prakash                                           ... Respondents
                     (Respondents 6 to 9 are brought on record as
                     LRS. of the deceased 1st respondent vide Court
                     order, dated 18.03.2022 made in C.M.P(MD) Nos.
                     2128 to 2131 of 2020)

                     (9th respondent is recognised as Power Agent of
                     the respondents 6 to 8 vide Court order, dated
                     18.03.2022 made in C.M.P(MD) No.1888 of
                     2022)

                     PRAYER: Appeal filed under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure,
                     against      the   decree      and    judgment      dated     20.08.2011        in
                     O.S.No.43 of 2008 on the file of the Additional District Judge, (Fast Track
                     Court No.I), Thoothukudi.


                                   For Appellants     : Mr.P.Jayaprakash Narayan

                                   For R-1            : died

                                   For R-3            : Mr.M.Saravanan

                                   For R-2            : No Appearance

                     2/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                   A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012


                                  For R-4 & R-5    : dismissed vide Court order, dated 04.07.2018

                                  For R-6 to R-9     : Mr.R.Pon Karthikeyan


                                                     JUDGMENT

***********

R.SUBRAMANIAN,J.

AND N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.

The parties have entered into a settlement. As per the

settlement, the legal heirs of the decree-holder namely, respondents 6 to 9

have given up their right over the suit property and they accept the title and

possession of the subsequent purchasers. The amount deposited towards the

balance of sale consideration is also agreed to be withdrawn by the ninth

respondent. The compromise memo is recorded.

2. The Appeal Suit is disposed of in terms of the compromise

memo. The compromise memo will form part of the decree and judgment.

Since the parties have settled the matter outside the Court, following the

Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in High Court of Judicature at

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012

Madras, rep. by its Registrar General Vs. M.C.Subramaniam and

Others reported in 2021 (3) SCC - 560, there will be a direction to the

Registry to refund the entire Court fee paid in the Appeal Suit. No costs.

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

                                                         [R.S.M.,J.]     [N.S.K.,J.]
                                                                 24.03.2022

                     Index:Yes/No
                     Internet:Yes/No
                     rm



                     To:

1.The Additional District Judge, (Fast Track Court No.I), Thoothukudi.

2.The Section Officer, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012

R.SUBRAMANIAN,J.

AND N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.

rm

JUDGMENT IN A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012

(2/2)

24.03.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis