G.Subramanian v. Martin (Deceased)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN C.S.No.486 of 2014:-

1. G.Subramanian, S/o.Late P.Gavaran

2. Dr.T.Sriram Thanigai, S/o.Dr.Thanigai Dhavamani

3. Dr.Sumitha Sriram, W/o.Dr.T.Sriram Thanigam ... Plaintiffs Vs.

1.Martin(deceased)

2. Sathiamullar

3. Anandaraj(deceased)

4. Emmiammal

5. Dinakaran

6. N.Subramanian

7. R.Balasubramanian

8. N.Pandian

9. Sasikala

10. M.Roopavathi

11. Princy Arularasi Anandraj

12. Minor Abana

13. Minor Abina

14. Minor Abidiel Prabu ... Defendants (Defendants 9 to 14 are brought on records as legal heirs of the deceased defendants 1 and 3 as per order dated 07.01.2022.) PRAYER: Civil Suit filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side, 1994 read with Order VII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking as follows:- (a) to declare the decree and judgment dated 21.11.2002 made in O.S.No.6925 of 1995 passed by the Hon'ble VII Assistant City Civil Court, Madras as null and void;

(b) to declare that the first plaintiff is the absolute owner of the property described as Item No.VI in the Schedule 'B' to the plaint; (c) to declare that the second plaintiff is the absolute owner of the property described as Item Nos.IV and V in the schedule 'B' to the plaint;

(d) to declare that the third plaintiff is the absolute owner of the property described as Item Nos. I to III in the schedule 'B' to the plaint;

(e) for permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 5 herein, their men, agents, servants, person of persons acting through or under them, or for and on their behalf, from in any manner, whatsoever, interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession, enjoyment, occupation, use of the respective property morefully described as Item No.I to VI in the Schedule 'B' to the plaint'

(f) for the costs of the suit; and (g) pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

For Plaintiffs : Mr.T.Gnana Banu For Mr.K.T.Devendran For Defendants : M/s.Paul & Paul (D1 to D5, D7, D9 to D12) Tr.C.S.No.306 of 2016

1. T.Sriram Thanigai, S/o.Thanigai Dhavamani

2. Sumitha Sriram, W/o.T.Sriram Thanigam ... Plaintiffs Vs.

1.Martin(deceased)

2. Sathia muller

3. Anandaraj(deceased)

4. Emmiammal

5. Dinakaran

6. Sasikala

7. M.Roopavathi

8. Princy Arularasi Anandraj

9. Minor Abana

10. Minor Abina

11. Minor Abidiel Prabu .... Defendants PRAYER: Transfer Civil Suit filed under Order VII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking as follows:-

(a) For permanent injunction restraining the defendants or their men, agents, servants, subordinates or any other person claiming through them from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs in the schedule property; (b) Mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the hut put by them in the schedule property;

(c) Permanent injunction restraining the defendants or their men, agents, servants, subordinates or any other person claiming through them from entering upon the schedule property or leveling and altering the nature of the schedule property. (d) Cost of the suit (e) And pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

For Plaintiffs : Mr.T.Gnanabanu For Mr.K.T.Devendran For Defendants : M/s.Paul & Paul C O M M O N J U D G M E N T In Tr. C.S. No.306 of 2016, a memo has been filed by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs, which has also been signed by the plaintiffs. The memo is as follows:-

"

2. Simultaneously, the defendants 2, 4 to 6 and also 8 to 11 has also filed a memo giving the details of the earlier payment and that they have paid the entire amount of Rs.2 crores to the plaintiffs. The memo is as follows:- "

Both the memos are recorded.

3.The learned counsel for the plaintiffs also made the following endorsement in the Court bundle:-

4. In view of the same, the suit stands dismissed as settled out of Court. The plaintiffs are entitled to refund of Court-fees in accordance with the rules. No costs.

5. In C.S. No. 486 of 2014, the learned counsel for the plaintiffs has filed the following memo:- "

"

6. The defendants has filed the following memo:- "

"

7. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs also made the following endorsement in the Court bundle:-

8. In view of the same, the suit is dismissed as withdrawn. The plaintiffs are entitled to refund of Court-fees in accordance with the rules. No costs.

25.08.2025 Index :Yes/No Speaking / Non-speaking order Maya

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

Maya Dated : 25.08.2025