V.Velsamy v. Angammal

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN and C.M.P(MD)No.5897 of 2020 V.Velsamy ... Appellant Vs.

Angammal ... Respondent Prayer: The Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 of C.P.C, to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 24.10.2019 passed in A.S.No.25 of 2016, on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 15.04.2016 passed in O.S.No.383 of 2009 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli.

For Petitioner : Mr.J.David Ganesan For Respondent : Mr.V.Sasi Kumar 1/8

JUDGMENT

The appellant/plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S.No.383 of 2009, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli, for permanent injunction restraining the respondent/defendant from evicting the appellant/plaintiff from the suit schedule property.

The respondent/defendant made a counter claim seeking recovery of possession of the subject property. The same was allowed and the said suit in O.S.No.389 of 2009 was dismissed by a judgment and decree dated 15.04.2016. Hence, the appellant/plaintiff has filed an appeal suit in A.S.No.25 of 2016, on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli and the same was also dismissed by a judgment and decree dated 24.10.2019.

2. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant/plaintiff preferred the second appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, the parties have entered into a compromise.

3. Today (24.04.2025), when the matter was taken up for hearing, both counsel on record would submit that they have already filed joint compromise memo dated 21.04.2025, which is extracted here under :- 2/8

3/8

4/8

5/8

4. The contents of the above joint compromise memo are read over and explained to both the parties and they would admit the same. The joint compromise memo filed by both the parties is recorded.

5. Accordingly, this second appeal is disposed of on the following terms:- 5.1. The compromise memo dated 21.04.2025 is hereby treated as part and parcel of the decree.

5.2. The suit in O.S.No.389 of 2009 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli, filed for permanent injunction restraining the respondent/defendant from evicting the appellant/plaintiff from the suit schedule property is dismissed and Decree in favour of the respondent/defendant in counter claim in O.S.No.389 of 2009 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli, is hereby confirmed on recording statement of appellant that he had already handed over the possession of the subject property to the respondent/defendant vide compromise memo dated 21.04.2025.

6/8

5.3. In view of the compromise entered into between the parties during the pendency of the second appeal, the appellant is entitled to refund of the court fee. Registry is directed to refund the court fee; 5.4. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

24.04.2025 NCC :yes/No Index :yes/No Internet:yes/No rgm 7/8

K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN , J.

rgm To

1. The Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli.

2. The Principal District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli.

3. The Section Officer, V.R. Section (Records) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

and C.M.P(MD)No.5897 of 2020 24.04.2025 8/8