S.Jagannathan (deceased) v. G.B.Sarath Babu
Judgment
Mr.M.Balasubramanian For Defendants .. Mr.R.Thiagarajan Tr.C.S.No.886 of 2004 G.B.Sarath Babu ..Plaintiff -Vs-
S.Jagannathan (deceased)
J.Jayanthi 3. Leelavathi 2
4. Sumathy 5. Shoba 6. J.Rajesh 7. J.Prakash Defendants 2 to 7, legal representatives of the deceased 1st defendant were brought on record by order made in A.No.5567/2014 dated 09.09.2014 ..Defendants For Plaintiffs .. Mr.R.Thiagarajan For Defendants .. Mr.M.Balasubramanian C O M M O N J U D G M E N T A joint memo of compromise has been duly signed by plaintiffs and second defendant. The 1st defendant is the father of the 2nd defendant and he has executed the sale deed in favour of the 2nd defendant. Both parties appeared in person. The joint memo of compromise is read over to the parties and they agreed to the terms and conditions therein.
2. The terms and conditions of the compromise reads as follows: “4. The Parties hereto have amicably settled the disputes among themselves and G.B.Sarath babu, the plaintiff in Tr.C.S.No.886 of 2004 has agreed to receive the sum of Rs.16,00,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs only) by Demand Draft bearing No.009012 dated 20.08.2014, drawn on United Bank of India, Usman Road Branch, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017, drawn in his name towards full and final settlement of all his claims in transfer C.S.No.886 of 2004 as against the defendants therein.
5. In consideration of the payment having been made to G.B.Sarath Babu by the legal heirs of 3 deceased S.Jagannathan, both the parties have signed the following compromise memo and G.B.Sarath Babu recognizes the right , title and interest of S.Jagannathan, since deceased, his legal heirs Jayanthi, J.Rajesh and J.Prakash, Leelavathy, Sumathy, Shoba in respect of the suit property viz., a Ground Floor shop portion, measuring an extent of 500 sq.ft. or thereabout together with 190 sq.ft. of undivided share of land out of 750 sq.ft. Comprised in T.S.No.4699, T.Nagar Village, bearing Old Door No.172, New door No.66, North Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.
6. The defendants Jayanthi, J.Rajesh, J.Prakash, Leelavathi, Sumathy and Shoba, are declared as the absolute owners of the suit property and entitled to have the compromise decree duly recorded on the file of Sub-Registrar, Theagaraya Nagar, Chennai, as their costs and expenses.
7. G.B.Sarath Babu has agreed to hand over the abandoned Original Document No.1598 of 2003, SRO, T.Nagar dated 14.07.20103, in view of the Joint Compromise Memo filed before this Hon'ble Court, in view of the settlement of the disputes herein.
8. The defendants Jayanthi, J.Rajesh, J.Prakash, Leelavathi, Sumathy and Shobha are entitled to have mutation of records in their names, like Patta, Corporation tax, Water and Sewerage Tax, Electricity connection in their names pertaining to the suit property. 4
9. Both the parties have no mutual claim as against each other of any nature in respect of the suit schedule mentioned property.
10. This Joint Memo of Compromise may be received and recorded and decree the suit in Tr.C.S.No.886 of 2004 to the extent of money claimed in lieu of the relief sought for in respect of the property and the suit in C.S.No.605 of 2003 may be decreed as prayed for.
11. Both the parties shall bear their respective costs.”
In view of the compromise entered into between the parties, the suit in Tr.C.S.No.886 of 2004 is decreed to the extent of money claimed in lieu of the relief sought for in respect of the property. The suit in C.S.No.605 of 2003 is decreed as prayed for. The joint memo of compromise shall form part of the decree. The 2nd defendant in C.S.No.605 of 2003 who is the plaintiff in Transfer C.S.No.886 of 2004 is directed to return document Nos.1 and 5 filed in Tr.C.S.No.886 of 2004 to the 6th Plaintiff Mr.J.Rajesh in C.S.No.605 of 2003 after giving proper undertaking before Court to produce them after substituting the originals with the certified copy of the same. The originals shall be produced by the 6th plaintiff in C.S.No.605 of 2003 as and when required by the Court. No costs. Note: Registry is directed to issue order copy on or before 19.09.2014
12.09.2014 5 ARUNA JAGADEESAN.,J. C.S.No.605 of 2003 Tr.C.S.No.886 of 2004
12.09.2014
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.