Madras High Court
Supreme Supreme Corporation vs Kathirasan on 15 September, 2022
A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 15.09.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012
and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2012
1.Supreme Supreme Corporation,
rep. by its Partner Brij Rathan Bagari,
No.33, Venkatasala Muthali Theru,
Chennai - 3.
2.R.R.Bagari (died)*
3.Gushal Bagari
4.Saraswathi Devi
5.Durga Daga
6.Giriraj Ratan Bagri
7.Brij Ratan Bagri
8.Sashi Lakhani
9.Nutan Bhattad ... Appellants
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012
(Appellants 4 to 9 are brought on record as legal heirs
of the deceased second appellant vide Court order
dated, 25.07.2022 made in CMP(MD) Nos.4957 to
4959 of 2022)
Vs.
1.Kathirasan
2.Ismail
3.Roshan Banu Lalitha
4.K.Kasilingam
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)
2/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012
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-2 : M/s.P.Sepana @ Sree
For R-3 : Mr.M.Saravanan
For R-4 to R-9 : Mr.R.Pon Karthikeyan
JUDGMENT
***********
J.NISHA BANU, J.
and
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
The defendants 1 to 3 are the appellants in this appeal. The
first respondent/plaintiff filed a suit seeking for the relief of declaring the
execution of the sale deed, dated 15.07.2008 by defendants 1 to 4 in favour
of the fifth defendant as null and void and for the relief of specific
performance to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff by virtue of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012
sale agreement, dated 05.11.2007 and for the relief of permanent injunction.
2. The trial Court through judgment and decree, dated
20.08.2011 decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the same, defendants 1 to 3 filed
the present appeal.
3. During the pendency of this appeal, the parties have entered
into a compromise and a compromise memo signed by all the concerned
parties and their counsel was filed before this Court.
4.Insofar as the second and third respondents are concerned,
they do not have any subsisting interest in this case, since the second
respondent joined along with appellants and sold the property in favour of
the third respondent and the third respondent, in turn, sold the property in
favour of the fourth and fifth respondents through a registered sale deed,
dated 28.12.2011. In view of the same, the affixture of signatures of the
second and third respondents in the compromise memo, fales into
insignificance.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012
5. The terms of compromise are extracted hereunder :
"1. The 6th to 9th respondents who are the
legal heirs of deceased Kathiresan (1st
respondent/plaintiff) have no objection in
allowing the present appeal in A.S.(MD) no 6 of
2012 and setting aside the Judgment and decree
dated 20.08.2011 made in O.S.No.43 of 2008 on
the file of Additional District Judge, Fast Track
Court No I, Tuticorin.
2. The 6th to 9th respondents who are the
legal heirs of Late Kathiresan have given up their
claim over the suit property and they accept the
title and possession of the subsequent purchasers
namely, Thiru.Kasilingam and Tmt.Palseivi (4th
and 5th respondents) over the suit property and
they will not claim any right or title, whatsoever,
in any manner in respect of the suit property.
3. The Appellants have no objection for the
9th respondent namely, K.Nehruprakash to
withdraw the amount of Rs.53,00,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Three Lakhs only) with accrued interests,
deposited by his father late Kathiresan (1st
respondent/plaintiff) on 10.10.2011 vide SBI
challan No.147 towards balance sale
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012
consideration in the credit of O.S.No.43 of 2008,
through lodgement schedule before the Additional
District Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Tuticorin.
The deposit is lying in the State Bank of India,
Beach Road Branch, Tuticorin.
4. In view of the compromise, the court
fees paid by the appellants may be refunded to
them. The appellants have no objection to refund
the court fees in the name of 7th appellant
namely, Brij Rathan Bagri."
6. In view of the above, this Appeal Suit is disposed of in terms
of the compromise memo and the terms of compromise shall form part of
the decree. Since the matter has been compromised between the parties, the
appellants will be entitled for the refund of Court fees. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
(J.N.B.,J.) (N.A.V.,J.)
15.09.2022
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012
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
J.NISHA BANU, J.
and
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
rm/Ns
A.S(MD)No.6 of 2012
15.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
