Madras High Court
M.A.Rathinavelu vs / on 23 June, 2025
Author: C.V.Karthikeyan
Bench: C.V.Karthikeyan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 23.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
T.O.S.No.19 of 2009
in
O.P.No.119 of 2009
1.M.A.Rathinavelu
2.M.A.Manickavelu .. Plaintiffs
/versus/
1.M.K.Siva Prakasam (Deceased)
2.M.K.Annamalai
3.M.S.Vijayalakshmi (Deceased)
4.M.S.Rajeswari
5.S.Gunasekar
6.M.S.Natarajan
7.A.Gowri Palani .. Defendants
(Defendants 3 to 6 impleaded as legal heirs of
Late.M.K.Sivaprakasam, 1st defendant as per order
dated 08.07.2013 in A.N.2697 of 2013.
(The memo filed by the plaintiffs is recorded. D3
died and the defendants 4 to 6 are recorded as
legal heirs of the deceased 3rd defendant as per
order dated 13.08.2014 on memo.)
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:35 pm )
(7th defendants impleaded as per order dated
07.10.2016 in A.No.4360 of 2016 and time
extended on 28.10.2016 in A.No.6222 of 2016).
This Suit is filed under Sections 222 and 276 of the Indian
Succession Act, XXXIX of 1925, prayed for grant of Letters of
Administration.
For Plaintiffs : Mr.N.Ramanujam
For D3 to D6 : Mr.M.Murugesan
For D7 : Mr.N.Ramamani
JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs, M.A.Rathinavelu and M.A.Manickavelu are
both present. They had filed O.P.No.119 of 2009 seeking probate of the
last Will and testament of their paternal uncle and paternal aunt,
M.K.Shanmuga Sundram Chettiar and Mrs.Thirupurasundari. The Will
was dated 23.05.1996. M.K.Shanmuga Sundaram Chettiar died on
14.08.1999 and Mrs.Thirupurasundari died on 10.05.2007. They had
impleaded as defendants M.K.Sivaprakasam another paternal uncle and
M.K.Annamalai their father.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:35 pm )
2.In view of the objections raised O.P.No.119 of 2009 was
converted as T.O.S.No.19 of 2009. Pending the proceedings, both the
defendants, M,K.Sivaprakasam and M.K.Annamalai had died. The legal
representatives of M.K.Sivaprakasam had been subsequently impleaded
as 3rd , 4th, 5th and 6th defendants namely, M.S.Vijayalakshmi,
M.S.Rajeswari, G.Gunasekar and M.S.Natarajan respectively. During the
proceedings, M.S.Vijayalakshmi also died and since her legal
representatives were already on record, there was no necessity to implead
any other party.
3.There is yet another application filed in A.No.4360 of 2016
by A.Gowri Palani who claimed to have a caveatable interest and that
application was allowed and she was impleaded as the 7th defendant.
Incidentally, she is a sister of M.K.Annamalai. In the counter affidavit
filed to the said application by the 1st plaintiff, M.K.Rathinavelu, he had
mentioned the fact that his father M.K.Annamalai had died on
01.04.2016. That fact had not been recorded in the cause title.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:35 pm )
4.Now the parties have entered into a settlement. The plaintiffs
have given up the Will and retained 65% share in the property and
accepted that the defendants are entitled to the balance 35% share in the
property. They affirmed their signatures in each and every page of the
compromise deed which had been presented before this Court, which is
termed as a Memorandum of Compromise entered into by the parties to
the suit and dated 23.06.2025. Both the learned counsels are also present.
They have also signed in the last page of the Memorandum of
Compromise . The description of the suit schedule property has been
given.
5.The plaintiffs have also undertaken to distribute the share of
the 4th defendant, M.S.Rajaswari. It is hoped that all the parties abide by
the terms of the compromise, which had been entered into out of free will
and consent by the parties who contested the suit.
6.The Memorandum of Compromise is recorded.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:35 pm )
7.In view of the same, the Testamentory Original Suit in
T.O.S.No.19 of 2009 stands decreed in accordance with the terms of
Memorandum of Compromise. No order as to costs. The Memorandum
of Compromise shall form part of the decree.
8.The learned counsel for the plaintiffs may also record the fact
that the 2nd defendant M.K.Annamalai had died and the same may be
recorded in the cause title of the suit before the order copy is issued.
23.06.2025
smv
Neutral citation : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order : Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:35 pm )
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.
smv
23.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 03:45:35 pm )
