Madras High Court
K.R.Seethapathy vs Mr.R.Thirumalai on 4 April, 2025
Author: Anita Sumanth
Bench: Anita Sumanth
OSA.No.118 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.04.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
and
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
Original Side Appeal No.118 of 2025
and CMP No.7343 of 2025
1. K.R.Seethapathy
2. S.Sathiendar
3. Tmt.S.Pramila
... Appellants
-Versus-
Mr.R.Thirumalai
... Respondent
Prayer:- Original Side Appeal filed under Order XXXVI Rule 9 of the
Original Side Rules read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, praying to
set aside the order dated 02.01.2025 passed in A.No.2459 of 2024 in
C.S.No.49 of 2018.
For Appellants : Mr.R.Rangarajan
For Respondent : Mr.A.Babu for R1
*****
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/04/2025 08:44:21 pm )
OSA.No.118 of 2025
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by C.KUMARAPPAN, J.)
Today the instant OSA is listed under the caption “To Report Progress
in Mediation”.
2. Both side counsels are present and would submit that a Mediation
Report has been forwarded from the Tamil Nadu Mediation and Conciliation
Center. As per the Mediation Report, there was an agreement between both
the parties. Both side counsels would submit that the present OSA can be
disposed of in terms of Joint Compromise Memo filed before the Mediation
Center.
3. We have also perused the Joint Memo of Compromise filed by the
appellants and respondent. The following terms and conditions have been
stipulated in the said Joint Memo of Compromise:-
1. The Appellants and the Respondents shall be referred to as to
Plaintiff and Defendant as per the ranks in the suit.
2. The suit has been filed by the Plaintiff for recovery of a sum
of Rs.2,26,19,400/- (Rupees Two Crores Twenty Six Lakhs
Nineteen Thousand and Four Hundred Only) with further
interest and costs against the Appellants/Defendants, which
is pending on the file of the Hon'ble High Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/04/2025 08:44:21 pm )
3. Pending the Suit, the Plaintiff has filed 2 Applications. One
for the attachment of the Application/Judges Summons
Schedule Property in O.A.No.85 of 2018 and another
Application for injunction in A.No.892 of 2018.
4. The Defendants gave an undertaking to the Hon'ble Court
that they will not alienate the property. The same was
recorded by the Hon'ble Court by its order dated 27.03.2018.
5. Contrary to the undertaking, the second defendant flouted the
undertaking by dealing with the properties by clearing the
mortgage at the first instance and creating another mortgage
in favour of a third party.
6. The Plaintiff immediately brought the same to the notice of
this Hon'ble Court and prayed for communication of the
Order to the Sub Registrar's office at Sriperumbatur in
A.No.7299 of 2019 which was granted by Order dated
18.12.2019 by the Hon'ble Court.
7. Inspite of the order being communicated and the creation of
the Mortgage at the first instance which was brought to the
notice of this Hon'ble Court, the 2nd defendant flouted the
order by selling the property with the Assistance of the bank
under a private treaty to a third party.
8. Therefore, this necessitated the Plaintiff to file an Application
for violation and disobedience of the Order of the Hon'ble
Court dated 27.03.2018.
9. On having received notice from this Hon'ble Court for
disobedience by the 2nd defendant, all the defendants
appeared before this Court and when the Court took serious
view of the violation of the Order, the Hon'ble Court passed a
further Order regarding disobedience.
“QUOTE”
“Today, both S.Sathiendar and S.Pramila are present.
Though their counsel made submissions to justify their
actions, this Court is not satisfied with the explanation.
This Court orders the Civil arrest of the 2nd Respondent
S.Sathiendar, who failed to infor the recovery officer
about the order of the Court and allowed to sell the
property by private negotiation with intention to defeat
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/04/2025 08:44:21 pm )
the right of the petition for a period of two months.
Necessary batta shall be paid by the Plaintiff and the
period of detention shall commence from 23.01.2024.”
“UN QUOTE”
10. Having aggrieved by the Order, the defendants preferred an
OSA in the above OSA and sought to justify their action.
However, having heard the appellants when the matter was
listed for admission on 27.03.2025, this Hon'ble Court was
not inclined to interfere with the Order of the Hon'ble Single
Judge. The Appellant/Defendant today ie 27-3-2025
requested this Hon'ble Court to grant time for settlement as
the parties are close relatives. Accordingly, the OSA was
referred to mediation on the same day at 3.00 PM.
11. As against a claim of Rs.2,26,19,400/- [Rupees Two Crores
Twenty Six Lakhs Nineteen Thousand and Four Hundred
Only] claimed by the Plaintiff, the defendants voluntarily
without any influence, coercion and fraud, offered to settle
the claim of the Plaintiff for a sum of Rs.78,50,000/- (Rupees
Seventy Eight Lakhs and Fifty Thousand Only) towards full
and final settlement of Plaintiff's Claim.
12. In order to avoid further litigation and considering the age of
the parties, it was mutually agreed to receive a sum of
Rs.78,50,000/- (Rupees Seventy Eight Lakhs and Fifty
Thousand Only) towards full and final settlement from the
Defendant and to record full satisfaction in the above suit.
13. The Plaintiff confirms having received a sum of
Rs.78,50,000/- (Rupees Seventy Eight Lakhs and Fifty
Thousand Only) by way of the following:
a. DD for a sum of Rs.68,50,000/- (Rupees Sixty Eight Lakhs
Fifty Thousand Only) bearing DD No.000052 drawn in Axis
Bank Kancheepuram Branch dated 26.03.2025; and
b. DD for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only)
bearing DD No.505768 drawn in ICICI Bank, Cenotaph
Road Branch, Chennai dated 26.03.2025;
Towards full and final settlement of his claims against the
Defendants.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/04/2025 08:44:21 pm )
14. The Plaintiff confirms that the Suit claim is settled out of
Court and the Plaintiff undertakes to withdraw the above suit
as settled out of court. Both the parties agreed to bear their
respective costs.
15. Since the matter has been settled out of court, the order of
injunction and attachment granted by the Hon'ble Court in
the Suit may kindly be vacated and the Order may be
communicated to the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar's Office.
16. The claim has been settled by the 2nd defendant on behalf of
the other defendants also. The appearance of the 1st and 2nd
defendants may be dispensed with.
17. The matter having been settled at mediation, the Plaintiff
prays for refund of full court fee paid by him in his name.
18. As regards the violation/disobedience of the order, the
Defendants having settled the claim of the Plaintiff, both the
parties prays that this Hon'ble Court may take lenient view in
favour of the 2nd Defendant and thus render justice.”
4. In view of the said Joint Memo of Compromise, this OSA stands
closed. The Joint Memo of Compromise shall form part of this judgment.
There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected CMP is also
closed.
(Dr.ANITA SUMANTH, J.) (C.KUMARAPPAN, J.)
04.04.2025
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-Speaking Order
kmi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/04/2025 08:44:21 pm )
Dr.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
and
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
kmi
To
The Sub Assistant Registrar,
Original Side,
High Court of Madras.
Original Side Appeal No.118 of 2025
04.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/04/2025 08:44:21 pm )
