A.Sankaralingam, v. A.Vasimalai Perumal,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.03.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY S.A(MD)No. 88 of 2021 and C.M.P(MD)No. 1399 of 2021

1. A.Sankaralingam

2. A. Balasubramanian

3. R. Maharani

4. R.Malar Manimegalai

5. A.Pandian

6. P. Arulkumar

7. P. Madhan Kumar P. Vasuki (Died)

8. Minor Aparajithvelan Represented by His Guardian, Pandian.

9. B. Mukesh Prabu ... Appellants Vs.

A.Vasimalai Perumal ... Respondent PRAYER: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Appellate Court/ Subordinate Judge, Thirumangalam, dated 03.09.2020 passed in A.S.No.104 of 2019 by confirming the Decree and Judgment passed by the Lower Court / 1/10

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur in O.S.No.33 of 2013 dated 01.10.2019 and allow the present Second Appeal. For Appellants : M/s.K.Jagadeesan, for A-1 to A-4, A-8 and A-9 M/s.K.S.Seenivasan, for A-5 to A-7 For Respondent : Mr.T.Ponkumar JUDGEMENT This Second appeal is filed by the defendants 1 to 4, 6 to 9 to set aside the Judgment and Decree of the Subordinate Court, Thirumangalam, dated 03.09.2020 passed in A.S.No.104 of 2019 by confirming the Decree and Judgment passed in O.S.No.33 of 2013, dated 01.10.2019 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur.

2. The defendants are the Appellants and the plaintiff is the Respondent herein. For the sake of convenience, the contesting parties shall be referred to as Plaintiff and Defendants.

3. The plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S.No.33 of 2013 for declaration to declare that item No.1 of the 'A' schedule property belongs to the plaintiff and the Defendants 1 & 2 and to grant Preliminary Decree for partition 2/10

of the suit 'A' schedule property and allot 1/3 share to the plaintiff and to declare that 'C' schedule property is a pathway of the plaintiff and the defendants and also seeking permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. The said suit was allowed. Against which, the Defendants have preferred an appeal in A.S.No.104 of 2019 and the same was dismissed. Against the dismissal, the Second Appeal is preferred.

4. Pending this Second appeal, the plaintiff has filed an affidavit stating that the parties have entered into compromise and prayed that the affidavit may be recorded and the Second appeal may be disposed of as per compromise entered between the parties. It is stated in the said affidavit that the Second Appeal may be allowed in favour of 6th defendant as far as Item No.1 in the 'A' schedule property is concerned. Further, the Second Appeal may be allowed in favour of the defendants 6 to 9 in respect of 'B' schedule property pertaining to common pathway. As far as the Item No.2 in 'A' schedule is concerned, the Second Appeal may be dismissed as against the defendants 3 to 9 and the suit may be decreed in favour of defendants 1 & 2 and plaintiff. The aforesaid affidavit is culled out hereunder:

3/10

4/10

5/10

6/10

7/10

5. Accordingly, this Second Appeal is disposed of based on the compromise stated supra. However, this compromise will not attract the principles of resjudicata for the persons who had purchased the property or who would purchase property. Hence, the issue is left open among the parties. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 19.03.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No KSA 8/10

To

1. The Subordinate Court, Thirumangalam.

2. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Peraiyur.

3. The Section Officer, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

9/10

S.SRIMATHY, J.

KSA Order made in S.A(MD)No. 88 of 2021 19.03.2024 10/10