Back
2024 Supreme(Mad) 537
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B. Balaji, J.
S. Devagi – Petitioner
Versus
N. Sathiyavani – Respondent
S.A. No. 605 of 2017
Decided On : 06-03-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :K. Thiruvengadam, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mohanamurali, Advocvate.
IMPORTANT POINT
The court upheld the settlement reached by the parties, leading to the dismissal of the second appeal and the suit for specific performance.
Headnote:
Specific Performance - Settlement of Dispute - The court dismissed the second appeal as the parties had amicably resolved their disputes and entered into a joint memo of compromise, leading to the dismissal of the suit for specific performance.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance, which was initially decreed by the trial court. However, the first appellate court reversed the findings, leading to the dismissal of the suit. The plaintiff filed a second appeal, but the parties later resolved their disputes amicably.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the second appeal as settled out of court, as the parties had reached a joint memo of compromise, where the respondent paid a sum of Rs.7,50,000 to the appellant in full and final settlement of the suit claim.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the amicable resolution of the parties, as evidenced by the joint memo of compromise, where the appellant gave up her right to seek performance of the registered agreement of sale.
Final Decision: The second appeal was dismissed as settled out of court, and the appellant was entitled to a refund of the court fee paid.
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and decree dated 17.09.2016 passed in A.S.No.4 of 2014 on the file of learned III Additional District Judge, Tirupattur thereby reversing the decree and judgment of O.S.No.25 of 2010 dated 30.11.2012 of learned Sub- Ordinate Judge, Vaniyambadi.)
1. The plaintiff in the suit for specific performance is the appellant in the above second appeal.
2. The trial Court initially decreed the suit. However, in appeal, the first appellate Court reversed the findings of the trial Court and the suit for specific performance came to be dismissed as against which the present second appeal has been preferred. Pending the above second appeal, the parties have amicably resolved their disputes.
3. The parties are also present. They have presented a Joint Memo of Compromise duly signed by the appellant and the respondent namely the plaintiff and the defendant in the suit. The respective Counsel for the appellant have also signed the Joint Memo of Compromise. The respondent has paid a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- to the appellant/Plaintiff in full and final settlement and satisfaction of the suit claim, even though, the suit being one for specific performance. In other words, the appellant/Plaintiff has given up her right to seek performance of the registered agreement of sale dated 22.01.2009.
4. It is also agreed between the parties that the plaintiff and the defendant shall execute and register necessary cancellation of the sale agreement dated 22.01.2009 which has been registered in Document No.229/2009 before the Sub-Registrar concerned.
5. The parties under the Joint Memo of Compromise prayed for return of the original sale agreement marked as Exhibit A1 and have also prayed for refund of Court Fee of Rs.10,500/- being made to the appellant, in view of the settlement arrived.
6. The Joint Memo of Compromise is recorded. The parties have been spoken to and they have also expressed their concurrence about the terms of compromise entered into. The Plaintiff/Appellant admits the receipt of Rs.7,50,000/- from the respondent/defendant and the parties also agreed to register a necessary cancellation document before the Sub-Registrar concerned.
7. In view of the above, the second appeal shall stand dismissed as settled out of Court and in terns of the Joint Memo of Compromise date 06.03.2024. Registry shall return the registered sale agreement dated 22.0.1.2009 marked as Exhibit A1 by substitution of the same with the certified copy to be produced by the counsel for the appellant.
8. The appellant shall also be entitled to for refund of the Court Fee paid in the second appeal, in view of the settlement arrived between the parties subject to any lawful deductions that are to be made.
9. In view of the above, the second appeal is dismissed as settled out of Court.
