CMP(MD) No.3573 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

Thursday, the Seventh day of July Two Thousand and Twenty Two

PRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.S.SUNDAR

and

The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice S.SRIMATHY

CMP(MD) No.3573 of 2022

in

A.S(MD)No.53 of 2017

1 CHITRA

2 R.VASANTHI

3 S.KALAISELVI ... PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS

Vs

1 PARAMASIVAM

2 P.GANESAN

... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

Petition filed praying that in the circumstances stated therein

and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court may be pleased

to grant an ad interim injunction restraining the respondents, their

men, agents or any person claiming under them from putting up

constructions or altering the physical features of the properties

which is the subject matter of the suit in O.S.No.132 of 2014 on the

file of Principal District Judge, Trichirappalli pending disposal of

the above first appeal in A.S(MD).No.53/2017.

PRAYER IN AS(MD) No.53 of 2017 :

Pleased to set aside the judgment and final decree dated

02.11.2016 in O.S.No.132 of 2014 on the file of the Learned

Principal District Judge, Tiruchirapalli and allow the first appeal.

ORDER : This petition coming up for orders on this day, upon

perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and

upon hearing the arguments of M/S.AL.GANTHIMATHI, Advocate for the

petitioners and of MR.K.PRABHAKARAN, Advocate on behalf of the

Respondents, the court made the following order:-

(The order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.)

As against the judgment and decree of the lower Court in

O.S.No.132 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Judge,

Trichirappalli, dated 02.11.2016, the petitioners/plaintiffs have

preferred the present appeal.

1/2

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

CMP(MD) No.3573 of 2022

2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the first

respondent is putting up construction in the suit schedule property.

Therefore, they have filed this petition to grant interim injunction

restraining the first respondent from putting up any construction in

the suit schedule property.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent has

produced before this Court, a set of photographs, to show that the

first respondent has undertaken some renovation work in a building.

The learned counsel further stated that no construction is put up by

the first respondent in any other suit schedule properties except

the renovation work. He further submitted that the first respondent

will not claim any right for allotment or claim equity by virtue of

any addition or expenditure he has made to renovate the building.

4. Recording the said undertaking, this petition is closed.

5. Registry is directed to list the appeal for final hearing

after four weeks.

sd/-

07/07/2022

/ TRUE COPY /

/07/2022

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

Madurai - 625 023.

TO

THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE,

TIRUCHIRAPALLI.

COPY TO :

1. THE SUB-ASSISTANT REGISTRAR,

A.E. SECTION,

MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

2. THE SECTION OFFICER,

JUDICIAL SECTION,

MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1 CC to M/s.AL.GANTHIMATHI, Advocate (SR-6786[I] dated 08/07/2022 )

+1 CC to M/s.K.PRABHAKAR, Advocate ( SR-6893[I] dated 11/07/2022 )

ORDER

IN

CMP(MD) No.3573 of 2022 in

A.S(MD)No.53 of 2017

Date :07/07/2022

USK/JM/SAR-II/13.07.2022/2P/6C

2/2

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