Madras High Court
Vellaiyan Moopan vs Paramasivan Moopan on 17 August, 2023
S.A.No.470 of 2004
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 17.08.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
S.A.No.470 of 2004
and
C.M.P.No.3770 of 2004
1.Vellaiyan Moopan
2.Pattan
3.Subramanian
4.Minor Gopal ... Appellants
Vs.
1.Paramasivan Moopan
2.Shanmugavelu (Died)
3.Mariappan
4.Isakkiammal
5.Mariammal
6.Balasubramanian
Respondents 4 to 6 brought on record
as the LRs of the deceased second respondent
vide Court order dated 02.01.2017 made in
M.P.(MD).Nos.2 to 4 of 2006 in S.A.No.470 of 2004. ... Respondents
PRAYER: The Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure
Code, against the judgment and decree dated 30.10.2002 passed in A.S.No.13 of
1999 on the file of Additional Sub Court, Tenkasi confirming the judgment and
the decree dated 21.07.1998 passed in O.S.No.460 of 1986 before the District
Munsif Court, Tenkasi.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.No.470 of 2004
For Appellants : Mr.M.Saravanan
For R1 : Mr.K.Sathiya Singh
for Mr.K.Chinnakaruppan
For R6 : Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy
For R3 to R5 : No appearance
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed by
the Additional Sub Court, Tenkasi in A.S.No.13 of 1999, dated 30.10.2002,
confirming the judgment and decree passed by the District Munsif Court, Tenkasi
in O.S.No.460 of 1986, dated 21.07.1998.
2. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel
appearing for both the parties submitted that pending the second appeal, the first
appellant has sold the property to the second respondent and the second
respondent passed away and his legal representatives have been impleaded as
respondents 4 to 6. They further submitted that to protect the interest of the
second respondent alone, this appeal came to be filed and now the appellants
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.No.470 of 2004
entered into a compromise with the contesting first respondent and the legal
representatives of the deceased second respondent. By virtue of the compromise,
the contesting first respondent has received a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from the
fourth respondent and relinquished his right in the subject matter of the property.
Therefore, now the respondents 4 to 6 can enjoy the property jointly. To that
effect, a joint compromise memo, dated 17.08.2023, has been filed by the parties
and the respondents 1 and 6 alone present before this Court and the respective
counsel also signed.
3. Since the first appellant has transferred the property in favour of the
second respondent pending the second appeal, they are not having any interest in
the subject matter of the property and only to protect the interest of the second
respondent, the second appeal came to be filed. Now the second respondent
passed away and the dispute is between the first appellant and the first
respondent. In order to resolve the dispute, the first respondent has received a
sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from the fourth respondent, who is one of the legal
representatives of the second respondent and he has paid said amount on his
behalf as well as on behalf of the respondents 5 and 6 as well. The third
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.No.470 of 2004
respondent is also one of the legal representatives of the first appellant and he has
also transferred the property in favour of the second respondent. The said
statement is recorded and this Second Appeal stands disposed of. The joint
compromise memo, dated 17.08.2023, filed by the parties shall form part of this
judgment. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
17.08.2023
akv
To
1.The Additional Sub Court,
Tenkasi.
2.The District Munsif Court,
Tenkasi.
3.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.No.470 of 2004
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY,J.
akv
S.A.No.470 of 2004
17.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
