Maruthavanan vs Mahalingam(Died)
2023 Latest Caselaw 14528 Mad

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 14528 Mad
Judgement Date : 22 November, 2023

Madras High Court

Maruthavanan vs Mahalingam(Died) on 22 November, 2023

                                                                                S.A.No.411 of 2004


                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                             DATED :      22.11.2023

                                                  CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. KALAIMATHI

                                              S.A.No.411 of 2004


                     Maruthavanan                          ... Plaintiff/Respondent/Appellant


                                                   -Vs-

                     1.Mahalingam(Died)
                     2.Rajendran                       ... Defendants/ Appellants/
                                                                         Respondents
                     (2 respondent who is already on record
                       nd

                     as LRs of the deceased R1, dated
                     21.07.2023)

                     3.Anji @ M.Anjammal
                     4.M.Govindarajan(died)
                     5.Devaki @ Kundukani(Died)
                     6.C.Amsam @ Chinnakundukani
                     7.S.Jayaraman

                     (R3 to R7 are brought on record as LRs of the
                     deceased 1st respondent vide Court order
                     dated 21.07.2023)




                     _________
                     Page 1 of 6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                  S.A.No.411 of 2004


                     8.G.Dhanam
                     9.G.Shankar
                     10.G.Saritha

                     (R8 to R10 are brought on record as LRs
                     of the deceased 4th respondent vide Court
                     order dated 21.07.2023)

                     11.Saminathan
                     12.K.Ramesh

                     (R11 and R12 are brought on record as LRs
                     of the deceased 5th respondent vide Court
                     order dated 21.07.2023)

                     PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil
                     Procedure     Code,     against   the   decree   and   judgment,       dated
                     20.06.2003 made in A.S.No.22 of 2003 on the file of the I Additional
                     Subordinate    Court,    Kumbakonam,       reversing   the   decree      and
                     judgment, dated 29.10.2001 in O.S.No.88 of 2000 on the file of the
                     District Munsif Court, Valangaiman sitting at Kumbakonam.


                                       For Appellant         : Mr.P.Thiagarajan
                                           For R2            : Mr.S.Gomathi Shankar

                                       For R1, R4&R5 : Died
                                       For R3,R6toR12 : No appearance




                     _________
                     Page 2 of 6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                  S.A.No.411 of 2004


                                                      JUDGMENT

Heard Mr.P.Thiagarajan, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant and Mr.S.Gomathi Shankar, learned counsel appearing for

the second respondent.

2.By order, dated 19.10.2023, this Court referred the matter

before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached to this Bench

to arrive at an amicable settlement. It appears that before the

Mediation Centre, the dispute has been settled between the parties

and the terms of which is reduced into writing and the parties have

also signed the same. Clause 6 of the terms of settlement is as

follows:

“6.The following settlement has been arrived between the parties hereto:

(a)On the very first hearing before the Mediation itself both the parties had a polite and cordial talk. They agreed to measure the plaint mentioned property with the help of a Civil Engineer.

_________

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

(b)On the second hearing a settlement was arrived between the parties to forego 8 ft 3 inches (till the end of the slanting wall of the appellant's house) on the eastern side and 109 ft on southern side, ie., 71.4 ft is agreed more than the available length of 38.6 ft. Hence, the agreed measurement to be given to the 2nd respondent is 25 x 109 ft.

(c)Further the appellant and the 2nd respondent Rajendran has agreed to mutate the revenue records as per the measurements agreed before the mediation.

(d)Further the appellant Maruthavanan has to construct the boundary walls on the eastern and southern side at his own cost.

(e)The other respondents from 3 to 12 are the legal heirs of the deceased 1st respondent Mahalingam. As the plaint schedule property is allotted to 2nd respondent Rajendran as per their family arrangement, the respondents 3 to 12 have not turned up and also not necessary party for this compromise.

(f)As per the above undertakings the dispute in this second appeal is settled.”

_________

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

3.Based on the settlement arrived between the parties

before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached to this Bench,

this Second Appeal stands disposed of. No costs. The settlement

agreement entered before the Mediation Centre shall form part of the

decree. No costs.

22.11.2023 NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Internet::Yes/No To

1.The I Additional Subordinate Court, Kumbakonam.

2.The District Munsif Court, Valangaiman, at Kumbakonam.

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