Arunachalam vs Palanivel
2024 Latest Caselaw 19103 Mad

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 19103 Mad
Judgement Date : 27 September, 2024

Madras High Court

Arunachalam vs Palanivel on 27 September, 2024

Author: T.V.Thamilselvi

Bench: T.V.Thamilselvi

                                                                           S.A. Nos.226 & 258 of 2008



                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED : 27.09.2024

                                                      CORAM

                              THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

                                              S.A. Nos.226 & 258 of 2008
                                                         and
                                                  M.P.No. 1 of 2008

                     S.A.No.226 of 2008

                     Arunachalam                                           ... Appellant

                                                    Versus

                     1. Palanivel

                     2. Ekambaram

                     3. Revenue Divisional Officer,
                        Katcheri Road,
                        Mayiladuthurai.

                     4. District Collector,
                        Nagapattinam.                                      ... Respondents



                     Prayer:- Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 C.P.C., against

                     the judgment and decree dated 22.03.2007 in A.S.No.124 of 2005 on the file


                     1/5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                             S.A. Nos.226 & 258 of 2008

                     of Addl. Subordinate Judge (Incharge), Myladuthurai as reversed the

                     judgment and decree dated 30.06.2005 in O.S.No.231 of 2003 on the file of

                     the District Munsif Court, Sirkali.

                                  For Appellant              : Mr.M.Venkataseshan

                                  For Respondents            : Mr.S.Vadivel Murugan for R2

                                                              Dr. S.Suriya for R3 and R4

                                                              R1 – refused
                     S.A.No.258 of 2008

                     1. Arunachalam
                     2. Rajendran                                             ... Appellants

                                                    Versus
                     1. Ekambaram

                     2. Thillainayagam

                     3. Sivaprakasam

                     4. Nalasekaran

                     5. Senthil                                               ... Respondents

                     Prayer:- Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 C.P.C., against

                     the judgment and decree dated 22.03.2007 in A.S.No.139 of 2005 on the file

                     of Addl. Subordinate Judge (Incharge), Myladuthurai as reversed the

                     judgment and decree dated 30.06.2005 in O.S.No.267 of 2003 on the file of

                     2/5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                   S.A. Nos.226 & 258 of 2008

                     the District Munsif Court, Sirkali.

                                        For Appellants          : Mr.M.Venkataseshan

                                        For Respondents         : R1 & R2 – No appearance

                                                                  R4 - Dismissed

                                                                  R3 & R5 – given up

                                                          JUDGEMENT

Today, when the matter taken up for hearing, both learned counsel for

appellants, learned counsel for 2nd respondent as well as learned Addl.

Government Pleader appearing for respondents 2 and 3 appeared. The

learned counsel for appellants submitted that there is a dispute between the

parties with regard to a pathway, but there is no objection raised on the side

of respondents to use the same as common. Furthermore, the pathway is a

common pathway and now the appellant is enjoying the same without any

objection. Hence, nothing survives for further adjudication in these Appeals.

Accordingly, these Second Appeals are dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

27.09.2024

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis S.A. Nos.226 & 258 of 2008