Madras High CourtSA/140/2013disposed of in memo of compromise

Balakrishnan v. Narayanasamy(Died)

2024-03-07Honourable Mr Justice V. Lakshminarayanan16 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07.03.2024 Coram THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN Second Appeal No.140 of 2013 & M.P.No.1 of 2013 Balakrishnan (as Family Manager) for himself and the other members of his family ... Appellant -Versus1.Narayanasamy (Died) 2.Krishnaswamy 3.Sundararajan 4.Radhakrishnan 5.Ganapathi 6.Perumal Padayachi 7.Mohamed Ali 8.Ranjith 9.Stephen Raj 10.Narayansami Konar 11.Stalin 12.Govindaraj 13.Ramasami 14.Vasanthi 15.Kavitha ... Respondents

(Respondents 12 to 15 brought on record as legal heirs of the deceased first respondent vide order dated 12.01.2024 in M.P.Nos.1, 2 & 3 of 2014.) Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgement and decree dated 16.02.2012 in A.S.No.79 of 2010 on the file of the Additional District Cum Sessions Court, (Fast Track Court No.3), Vridhachalam confirming the judgment and decree dated 29.04.2010 passed in O.S.No.189 of 2003 before the Principal Sub Court, Vridhachalam. For Appellant : Mrs.R.Meenal For Respondent 12 : Mr.Govindaraj (Party in person) appeared through VC For Respondents 6, 7, 9 : No appearance R1, R2 & R10 - died R3 to R5, R8, R11 & R13 - Not ready in notice R14 & R15 - Refused JUDGEMENT This second appeal arises out of the judgment and decree of the court of Principal Subordinate Judge at Vridhachalam in O.S.No.189 of 2003 as confirmed in A.S.No.79 of 2010 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court-III) Vridhachalam.

2. Mrs.R.Meenal represented that pending the appeal, the parties have settled the matter and have entered into a memorandum of Compromise before Mr.P.Rajendran, Advocate, Vridhachalam and produced the joint memo of compromise. She also filed her memo on behalf of the appellant signed by herself, Mrs.R.Meenal.

3. In order to satisfy myself with the genuineness of the memo, I requested the parties to appear before me. Mr.Balakrishnan, the appellant and Mr.Govindarajan the twelfth respondent appeared via video conferencing. Mr.A.Rajasekaran, Advocate (Enrl. No.Ms3490/2018) practising in Vridhachalam, has identified the parties, who have appeared via video conferencing as parties in the appeal.

4. I have enquired with the appellant and the twelfth respondent, who appeared via video conferencing and both of them confirmed that they have entered into a memo of compromise, in terms of the memo filed by Mrs.R.Meenal.

5. For ready reference, the Joint Memo of Compromise and the memo on

behalf of the appellant are reproduced hereunder:

6. I have gone through the memo of compromise as well as the memo and I do not find anything unlawful or illegal in the same. Accordingly, the second appeal is disposed of in terms of memo of compromise entered into between the parties. The memo of compromise and the memo filed by the learned counsel for the appellant in SR.No.8331 of 2024 dated 04.03.2024 shall form part of the record. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

07.03.2024 nl Index : yes / no : yes / no Speaking / Non Speaking Order

To 1.The Additional District Cum Sessions Court, (Fast Track Court No.3), Vridhachalam 2.The Principal Sub Court, Vridhachalam.

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

nl 07.03.2024