SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.BAGYALAKSHMI – Appellant
Versus
R.NACHIMUTHU (Died) – Respondent
SA 381/2012



Advocates:
['M/S C R PRASANAN', '', 'A PALANIAPPAN', 'T SEZHIAN', 'M/S SARVABHAUMAN ASSOCIATES', '', 'amp; S MUKUNTH']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

RESERVED ON

12.07.2021

PRONOUNCED ON

03.08.2021

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

S.A.NO.381 OF 2012

AND

M.P.NO.1 OF 2012

(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)

1. G.Bagyalakshmi

2. G.Sakthivel

3. G.Shanmugam (Died)

4. G.Anantha Kumar

5. S.Palaniammal

6. Minor S.Yogeswaran

rep.by his mother/guardian

S.Palaniammal

7. Minor S.Dharani

rep.by his mother/guardian

S.Palaniammal

(Appellants 5 to 7 brought on record as Lrs.

of Appellant 3 vide order dated 12.07.2021

made in C.M.P.No.10318 of 2021)

...Appellants/

1 to 4 Plantiffs/5 to 7 Appellants

vs.

1. Nachimuthu (Died)

... Respondent/Defendant

2. Dhamodharan

3. Chinnarasu

4. Pappathi

5. Jaya

lakshmi

6. Gokila

7. Jayanthi

(Respondents 2 to 7 brought on record as

Legal representatives of sole respondent

vide order dated 12.07.2021 made in

C.M.P.No.17130 to 17132 of 2017 in SA.No.381/2012)

.. Respondents/

2 to 7 Respondents

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

This Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of

the Civil Procedure, against the Judgment and Decree dated

27.07.2011 in A.S.No.90 of 2008, on the file of the First

Additional District Court, Coimbatore confirming the Judgment

and Decree dated 15.07.2008 in O.S.No.1413 of 2001 on the file

of the Principal Sub-ordinate Court, Coimbatore.

For Appellants

: Mr.C.R.Prasanan

For Respondents

: Mr.S.Mukunth

for M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates

J U D G M E N T

This Second Appeal has been filed by the legal

representatives of the deceased plaintiff against the Judgment

and Decree dated 27.07.2011 passed by the I Additional District

Court, Coimbatore (hereinafter referred to as First Appellate

Court) in A.S.No.90 of 2008.

2. By the impugned Judgment and Decree, the Appellate Court

had dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants herein against

the Judgment and Decree dated 15.07.2008 passed by the Principal

Subordinate Court, Coimbatore (hereinafter referred to as Trial

Court) in O.S.No.1413 of 2001.

3. The plaintiff (since deceased), whose interest was

represented by second to fifth plaintiffs before the Trial Court

and the appellants herein had originally filed in O.S.No.1413 of

2001 on 20.11.1998 for the following reliefs before the Trial

Court:-

“ i. for specific performance of the agreement

dated 22.11.1995 and directing the defendant to

execute the sale-deed on receipt of the

remaining sale consideration for a sum of

Rs.14,800/- (fourteen thousand eight hundred

rupees only) out of the total consideration

agreed by the defendant (seller) fixing the

sale-price for a sum of Rs.2,15,000/- (two

lakhs and fifteen thousand rupees only) free

from all encumbrances within a date to be

specified by this Court and in case the

defendant commit default to get sale deed

executed and registered by this court in favour

of the plaintiff by the defendant at the cost

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

of the defendant herein;

ii. directing the defendant to pay the cost of

the suit;

iii. pass such other suitable reliefs like

return the entire advances with 36% annual

interest (compound) from the period of receipt

of the advance(s) till the same are returned to

the plaintiff in case if she desires.”

4. The suit was filed by the deceased plaintiff (Ponnammal)

on 20.11.1998. It was just two days before the expiry of the

lapses of period of three years limitation on payment of a token

Court Fee of Rs.1.

5. Subsequently, the Court Fee was paid over a period of

time and finally the suit was taken on file on 07.12.2001,

though no supporting application for extension of time under

Section 149 of CPC was filed by the deceased plaintiff before

the Trial Court. The Trial Court kept extending the time to pay

the Court Fee by the deceased plaintiff. Ultimately, the suit

was numbered on 07.12.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top