A stranger cannot file an independent suit challenging the lawfulness of compromise decree. The compromise decree operates as estoppel until it is established that the same has been obtained by fraud, coercion and undue influence.

Appeal Suit.No.1055 of 2003

IN THE HIGH Court OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Reserved on

18.12.2023

Pronounced on

21.12.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI

Appeal Suit.No.1055 of 2003

Veerammal

......Appellant/Defendant

Vs.

1.Ajagammalle

2.Appourttirane

3.Subangi

4.Malady

5.Revathy

6.Sarathy

7.Kidha (died)

8.Mohanapriyan

9.Minor Nadhini

10.Minor Guna

Respondents 9 and 10 represented by guardian

Amavasai paternal under of Respondents.

1/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Appeal Suit.No.1055 of 2003

(Respondents 8 to 10 are brought as record as

legal of the deceased 7^th respondent made in

C.M.P.No.516 & 517 of 2012 in

A.S.No.1055 of 2003 vide Court order dated

14.11.2018 (PTAJ)

....Respondents/Plaintiffs

Prayer: Appeal Suit has been filed under section 19(1) of the Family

Court Act, against the judgment and Decree dated 11.02.1999 made in

O.S.No.22 of 1996 on the file of the Family Court, Pondicherry.

For Appellants

: Mr.A.S.Manisha

For T.R.Rajaraman

For R1 to R6 : Mr.K.V.Sundararajan

For R7

:

For R8 to R10 : No appearance

JU D G M E N T

This appeal is directed against order dated 11.01.1999 made in

O.S.No.22 of 1996 on the file of the Family Court, Pondicherry.

For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as per their

2/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Appeal Suit.No.1055 of 2003

rankings in the suit.

2. The case of the plaintiffs is that the plaintiffs filed the suit for

setting aside the judgment and decreetal order dated 26.6.95 in

O.S.No.26/94 on the file of the Family Court at Pondicherry.

3. The plaintiffs averred that the defendants have filed the suit

against one deceased Ranganathan, the husband of the first plaintiff and

the father of the other plaintiffs 2 to 6 herein in O.S.No.26/94 on the file

of this Court claiming for maintenance at the rate of Rs.1000/- per month

and also creating charge over the B Schedule Property and in the said suit,

the deceased Shanemougame @ Ranganathan had filed his written

statement, in which, he clearly stated that the first defendant is not his wife

and the second defendant is not born to him through the first defendant

and he also completely denied any kind of marriage or wedlock with the

first defendant and also stated that he is not under any legal or moral duty

to maintain the defendants therein.

4. The plaintiffs submitted that the deceased Shanmougame @

3/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Appeal Suit.No.1055 of 2003

Ranganathan had already married the first plaintiff herein according to

Hindu rites and customs at Mannadipet and the marriage was registered in

Etat Civil Office, Mannadipet Commune Panchayat, Pondicherry and out

of the said wedlock the plaintiffs 2 to 6 were born, and their birth were

also duly registered in the office of the Mannadipet Commune Panchayat,

Pondicherry and therefore the allegations made by the defendants herein in

O.S.No.26/94 that the first defendant was legally wedded wife of the

deceased Ranganathan by virtue of the marriage solemnized on 19.6.1968

at Mannadipet and three children were born in wedlock are utter

falsehood and there is no iota of evidence to such allegations.

5. The plaintiffs further submitted that the second defendant became

major and she was already given in marriage to one Kuppusamy of

Sompet colony and a male child by name Mohanapriyan was born to

them. The said fact was also suppressed by the defendants in

O.S.No.26/94 and hence, both the defendants are not entitled to any relief

including the relief of maintenance.

6. The plaintiffs further averred that subsequent to the filing of the

written statement in O.S.No.26/94 they came to know that the defendant

4/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Appeal Suit.No.1055 of 2003

have no case at all and they had taken advantage of the old age and

drinking habit of the deceased Shanmougame @ Ranganathan