Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 4027 (MAD)

V. Shamsundar v. T. N. Balasubramaniam

2010-09-03

M.JAICHANDREN

body2010
Judgment :- 1. Today, when the matter is listed under the caption `For reporting settlement , the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant had submitted that there has been a settlement in the matter. 2. A joint memo signed by the parties, as well as the counsels appearing on their behalf has been filed before this Court. The joint memo filed before this Court is as follows: "The parties hereto have wholeheartedly decided to settle the above second appeal the following terms: 1) The Respondent herein has agreed to withdraw his claim against the appellant as a cultivating tenant and undertakes not to disturb the possession of the Appellant over the suit properties, which is the subject matter in O.S.No.610 of 1994 and O.S.No.941 of 1994, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Erode. 2) The suit O.S.No.610 of 1994, Subordinate Court, Erode, shall stand dismissed and O.S.No.941 of 1994 shall stand decreed. 3) The Appellant therefore is the absolute owner of the suit properties and the respondent cannot claim any right over the same whatsoever henceforth. The above terms of the compromise agreed to between the parties may be recorded and a Decree may be passed on the above terms." 3. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned and in view of the joint memo filed before this Court, the Second Appeal is disposed of in terms of the memo of compromise. The memo of compromise shall form part of the decree . No costs.