Madras High Court
John Christopher vs Dr.J.Stalin Joseph on 7 November, 2024
Author: Krishnan Ramasamy
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
S.A.(MD)No.310 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 07.11.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
S.A.(MD)No.310 of 2024 &
C.M.P.(MD)No.6998 of 2024
John Christopher ...Appellant
vs.
1.Dr.J.Stalin Joseph
2.T.Sundharabai ...Respondents
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil
Procedure praying to set aside the Judgement and Decree in A.S.No.14 of
2018 dated 30.07.2019 on the file of the Additional District Judge,
Padmanabhapuram reversing the Judgement and Decree in O.S.No.200
of 2010 dated 21.02.2014 on the file of the Sub Court,
Padmanabhapuram, Kanniyakumari District.
For Appellant : Mr.V.Rajiv Rufus
For Respondents : Mr.Pon.Karthikeyan for R1
Mr.M.Suriya Bagavandass
for Mr.Rajagobalan for R2
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.(MD)No.310 of 2024
JUDGEMENT
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel
appearing for the appellant would submit that the issue is with regard to
the consent decree recorded by the Additional District Judge,
Padmanathapuram to the effect that the appellant ought to pay a sum of
Rs.20,00,000/- to the first respondent. It is contended by the learned
counsel that the appellant came to know about such a Judgement only
after the receipt of the Judgement copy. It is his contention that fraud has
been played in obtaining such a Judgement and Decree before the
Additional District Court, Padmanathapuram. Therefore, the present
appeal.
2. However, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent
would submit that no fraud has been played in obtaining the consent
decree and in the event, if any fraud has been played, the appellant
should approach the concerned Court where the consent decree was
obtained and not this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. This Court is also of the considered view that it would be
appropriate to challenge the Judgment and Decree before the concerned
Court by filing appropriate petition, for which, consent has been arrived
by both the counsel. The appellant is also present before this Court in
person.
4. After elaborating the appellant about what transpired before this
Court, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant seeks liberty to
withdraw this appeal and approach the Additional District Court,
Padmanathapuram by filing an appropriate petition to challenge the
Judgment and Decree. He further submits that a Memo would also be
filed to that effect by today itself.
5. In the event if any such application is filed, the learned
Additional District Judge, Padmanathapuram shall decide the issue
without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. Recording the submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing for the appellant, this Second Appeal is dismissed as
withdrawn. Liberty is granted to the appellant to file a petition before the
concerned Court within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order. It is left open to the parties to raise all their
contentions before the concerned Court in the event if any petition is
filed by the appellant before the Court which passed the consent decree.
Memo to be filed by the appellant today shall form part and parcel of the
Judgement. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition
is closed.
07.11.2024
NCC:Yes/No
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
mbi
To
1.The Additional District Judge,
Padmanabhapuram
2.The Sub Court,
Padmanabhapuram, Kanniyakumari District
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
mbi
07.11.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
