Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1598 (MAD)

Murugesan v. Andisamy @ Raja

2018-04-28

M.SUNDAR

body2018
JUDGMENT : 1. Appeal in A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010 being prior in point of time shall be referred to as 'senior appeal' and appeal in A.S(MD)No.185 of 2011 being later in point of time, shall be referred to as 'junior appeal'. 2. Mr.V.Ramakrishnan, learned counsel on record for two appellants in senior appeal, i.e., Murugesan and Umamaheswari [who are respondents 3 and 4 in junior appeal] is before this Court. Mr.K.Govindarajan, learned counsel on record for respondents 1 and 2, i.e., Andisamy @ Raja and Vijaya, in senior appeal [who are appellants respectively in junior appeal], is before this Court. 3. To be noted, respondents 3 and 4 in senior appeal, i.e., Savithiri and Maheswari are respondents 1 and 2 in junior appeal. I am informed that Savithiri and Maheswari have remained ex parte throughout. Under the aforesaid circumstances, I am informed that the aforementioned four litigants have arrived at a compromise. 4. All the aforesaid four litigants, who are parties to the compromise, are before this Court with their respective counsel. They have placed before me a memorandum of compromise, dated 28.04.2018, duly signed by all the aforesaid four litigants and their respective counsel. 5. All the aforesaid four litigants have produced their respective photo identity cards along with self-attested photocopies of the same. The photo identity cards are Government identity cards in the form of Aadhaar card, Ration card, Voter's identity card, etc. 6. All the four litigants submit that they have signed/affixed thumb impression in the aforesaid memorandum of compromise after understanding the contents of the same or after having it read over to them and after understanding the contents of the same. All the litigants agree that the terms are in order and they reiterate the terms of the memorandum of compromise. 7. Both the learned counsel, on instructions from their respective parties, request that a compromise decree be passed in terms of the aforesaid memorandum of compromise in the aforesaid two appeals. 8. Two aspects in the memorandum of compromise are to be noted. One is in clause No.3 of the memorandum of compromise, the fact that the two above mentioned individuals, i.e., Savithiri and Maheswari remained ex parte throughout, has been clearly mentioned. 8. Two aspects in the memorandum of compromise are to be noted. One is in clause No.3 of the memorandum of compromise, the fact that the two above mentioned individuals, i.e., Savithiri and Maheswari remained ex parte throughout, has been clearly mentioned. The second aspect is in clause No.3, there is also a mention that respondents 1 and 2 in the senior appeal, i.e., Andisamy @ Raja and Vijaya, shall jointly be paid a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- [Rupees eleven lakhs only]. Both litigants, i.e., Andisamy @ Raja and Vijaya confirmed that they have received the said sum today. 9. Besides this, there is also a schedule of properties in Tamil, annexed to the memorandum of compromise and forming part of the memorandum of compromise. To be noted, that has been captioned as 'Description of Properties'. 10. In the light of the narrative supra, there shall be a decree in both the appeals, i.e., A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010 and A.S(MD)No.185 of 2011 in terms of the aforesaid memorandum of compromise. I deem it appropriate to extract the terms of compromise, which reads as follows: “Terms of compromise: i. The respondents 1 and 2 in A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010 and who are the appellants in A.S(MD)No.185 of 2011 admit that the suit properties except item No.11 ere the absolute and self-acquired properties of the Late.Mani Asari and admit that the mother of the appellants in A.S.No. 158 of 2010, Late Tmt.Masilamani was the legally wedded wife of the Late Maniasari and that appellants in A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010 are children of the said Mani Asari and Late.Masilamani. ii. The respondents 1 and 2 in A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010/Appellants in A.S(MD)No.185 of 2011 accept and concede to the fact that the suit properties except item No.11 being the self-acquired properties of Late Mani Asari, the settlement deed dated 10.01.2005 marked as Ex.B14 in the said suit is true and genuine and binding on them and therefore, the suit properties except item No.11 are the absolute properties of 1st appellant in A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010. iii. The Appellants in A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010 by considering the relationship between the parties and also on advice of the mediators and elders have agreed to pay a sum of Rs. iii. The Appellants in A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010 by considering the relationship between the parties and also on advice of the mediators and elders have agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs only) to the plaintiff/respondents 1 and 2 on the date of recording this compromise and the respondents 1 and 2 have inturn agreed to receive the said amount from the appellants towards the full quits of all their claims and have agreed and accept to give up all their claims in respect of the suit properties in entirety by virtue of this compromise and they agreed that they will not make any claim in any manner whatsoever in respect of the suit properties except item 11 in the suit schedule properties against the appellants in A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010. iv. Both the parties agree that they shall not make any claim as against each other in future in respect of the suit properties except item 11 in any manner whatsoever since the suit properties are admittedly the absolute properties of the 1st appellant in A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010. v. It is agreed and accepted by both the parties that item No.11 of the suit schedule property shall be maintained as the only common ancestral property belonging to all the sharers with their respective shares and agreed that in case of any repair or reconstruction consent of all parties is necessary. It is also agreed that all parties are having right of possession and title according to the extent of their share in item no.11 of the suit schedule properties. Both the parties agree that the appeal in A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010 may be allowed partly in respect of all the suit properties except item No.11 of the suit properties and may be dismissed in respect of item No.11 alone. vi. Both the parties agree and pray that both the appeals may be disposed of as per the terms of the compromise”. 11. There shall be a decree in terms of the aforesaid memorandum of compromise, dated 28.04.2018, which along with the schedule and photocopies of the photo identity cards of the aforesaid four litigants, shall form part of the compromise decree, in these two appeal suits. 12. Both the appeals, i.e., A.S(MD)No.158 of 2010 and A.S(MD)No.185 of 2011 stand disposed of on above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P(MD)No.1 of 2010 is closed.