Madras High Court
S.H.Naina Moahmed vs S.Sheik Mohammed on 13 October, 2023
2023/MHC/4713
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 13.10.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
S.A(MD)NO.216 OF 2021
and
C.M.P(MD)No.3090 of 2021
S.H.Naina Moahmed :Appellant/Appellant/Second
Respondent/Second defendant
.vs.
S.Sheik Mohammed : Respondent/Respondent/
Petitioner/Plaintiff
PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil
Procedure Code against the judgement and decree passed in
A.S.No.118 of 2018,dated 19.12.2019, on the file of the Principal
District Court,Dindigul, Dindigul District confirming the judgment
and decree made in O.S.No.89 of 1991, dated 5.2.2018, on the file
of the Principal Sub Court, Dindigul, Dindigul District.
For Appellant :Mr.G.Gomathi Shankar
For Respondent :Mr.N.S.Karthikeyan
JUDGMENT
*********
This Second Appeal is filed Challenging the judgement and
decree passed in A.S.No.118 of 2018, dated 19.12.2019, on the file
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
of the Principal District Court,Dindigul, Dindigul District confirming
the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.89 of 1991, dated
5.2.2018, on the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Dindigul, Dindigul
District.
2.The respondent, as plaintiff, filed a suit in O.S.No.89 of
1991 seeking partition of 163/216 share and for other reliefs. After
contest, the suit was decreed by the trial Court. Against the said
judgment and decree, an appeal in A.S.No.52 of 1998 was filed on
the file of Principal Sub-Court, Dindigul and that ended in dismissal.
Against the said dismissal, a Second Appeal was filed by the
respondent in S.A.No.140 of 2004 and that was also dismissed. The
matter was taken before the Honourable Supreme Court in Special
Leave Petition in C.C.No(s)21197 of 2015 and that also ended in
failure.Subsequently, the plaintiff filed I.A.NO.353 of 2013 for
passing a final decree. The learned Principal Subordinate Judge
passed a final decree on 5.2.2018 alloting shares. Against the said
order, the appellant filed A.S.No.118 of 2018 and that was also
dismissed. Thus this appeal is filed.
3.During the hearing in the appeal, it is submitted by the
learned counsel for the parties that as per the final decree, shares
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
have been allotted.The respondent filed E.P.No.316 of 2019 for
delivery of the share allotted to him. After hot contest, delivery of
the respondent’s share was given to him and the respondent had
taken possession of the share allotted to him.
4.In the circumstances stated above, this Court finds that the
matter had been taken upto the Honourable Supreme Court against
the judgment in O.S.No.89 of 1991. Now after a long drawn legal
battle, the respondent was delivered with his share of the property.
Thus, this Court is of the view that there is nothing to be
adjudicated in this Second Appeal, especially, there is no substantial
question of law for consideration in this Second Appeal.
5.In this view of the matter, the Second Appeal is dismissed.
No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
13.10.2023
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
NCC:Yes/No
vsn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Principal District Judge,
Dindigul.
2.The Principal Sub-Court,
Dindigul.
3.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN,J.
vsn
JUDGMENT MADE IN
S.A(MD)NO.216 OF 2021
and
C.M.P(MD)No.3090 of 2021
13.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
