D.Vignesh vs K.Sengotuvelan
2023 Latest Caselaw 6116 Mad

                                                                                 C.M.A.(MD)No.522 of 2023


                             BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                               DATED : 13.06.2023

                                                    CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

                                             C.M.A.(MD)No.522 of 2023

                1.D.Vignesh
                2.D.Bharani
                3.D.Vimala
                4.J.Loganayaki                                    ...Appellant/Respondents 1 to 4
                                                                               /Defendants 1 to 4

                                                      Vs.

                Tanjore Roller Flour Mill,
                Represented by its Partners,

                1.K.Sengotuvelan
                2.K.Venkatesh
                3.Kalyani                            ...Respondents 1 to 3/Petitioners/Plaintiffs

                4.G.Swaminathan
                5.Asai Thambi
                6.V.Suresh                           ...Respondents 4 to 6/Respondents 5 to 7/
                                                                              Defendants 5 to 7

                PRAYER: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Order 41 Rule 1 of
                Civil Procedure Cod, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 24.01.2023
                passed in I.A.No.264 of 2021 in O.S.No.215 of 2021 on the file of the Principal
                District Court, Thanjavur.



                1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                         C.M.A.(MD)No.522 of 2023


                                           For Appellants     : Mr.P.Rajaram
                                           For R1 to R3       : Mr.P.Vadivel


                                                            JUDGMENT

The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed challenging the

interim injunction granted by the trial Court as against the respondent not to

alienate the suit property till the disposal of the suit.

2.The suit has been filed for declaration and permanent injunction.

Pending suit, an application has been filed seeking interim injunction. On

considering the evidence and materials on record, the trial Court granted an

interim injunction till the disposal of the suit. Challenging the same, the present

appeal is filed.

3.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that originally the suit

property belongs to a partnership firm. Some of the partners were retired on

27.06.2022. One of the retired partners had sold certain properties belonging to

the partnership firm in favour of his son Devarajan. The said Devarajan,

subsequently sold the property obtained from his father to the fifth respondent

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.(MD)No.522 of 2023

herein. After the demise of Devarajan, his legal heirs sold the remaining

properties to the fourth respondent. Thereafter, the fourth and fifth respondents

have sold the same to the sixth respondent. Now the patta is in the name of the

sixth respondent, who is a bona fide purchaser. The trial Court without

considering all these aspects had simply granted an order of interim injunction and

the same has to be interfered.

4.The learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the

sixth respondent had executed a power of attorney deed in respect of the property

in question and tried to sell the same hiding the pendency of the suit. Hence, the

trial Court had granted an interim injunction till the disposal of the suit and the

same does not require any interference.

5.Considering the documents and evidence adduced on both sides, the

trial Court had found that during the pendency of the suit, there cannot by any

sale. Aggrieved over the same, the present appeal came to be filed.

6.On perusal of the order of the trial Court this Court is satisfied with

that the trial Court on appreciation of documents had granted an order of interim

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.(MD)No.522 of 2023

injunction. At this stage, this Court cannot interfere with the same. At the most,

the trial Court can be directed to expedite the suit and dispose of the suit within a

period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

With the above observation, this appeal is dismissed.

13.06.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No ta

To

1.The Principal District Court, Madurai.

2.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Special District Court), Madurai

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

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.(MD)No.522 of 2023

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

ta

C.M.A.(MD)No.522 of 2023

13.06.2023

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