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

MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Hotel Ornate (Nilgiry) Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Lakshmipriya Nagendran – Respondent
CRP(MD) 2331 2022



CRP(MD)No.2331 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

RESERVED ON: 02.12.2022

PRONOUNCED ON : 07.03.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

CRP(MD)No.2331 of 2022

and

CMP(MD)No.11236 of 2022

Hotel Ornate (Nilgiry) Private Limited,

No.310, Veerasarkar Marg,

Dadar, Mumbai,

Represented by its Power Agent,

S.Srinivasan

... Petitioner

Vs

Lakshmipriya Nagendran

... Respondent

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227

of the Constitution of India, to allow this civil revision

petition by setting aside the fair and decreetal order

passed in IA.No.235 of 2014 in OS.No.56 of 2014 on the file

of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate No.1,

Kodaikanal dated 26.04.2022.

For petitioner

: Mr.H.Arumugam

For Respondent

: Mr.M.Kannan

1/20

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

CRP(MD)No.2331 of 2022

ORDER

The Revision Petitioner before this Court is the

1st defendant in the OS.No.56 of 2014 on the file of the

District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court No.1,

Kodaikanal. The petitioner / 1st defendant filed the an

application in IA.No.235 of 2014 under Order 3 Rule 2 of

the Code of Civil Procedure, to permit the petitioner to

proceed with the case on behalf of the 1st defendant as a

power agent. The trial court by its fair and decretal order

dated 26.04.2022 dismissed the application in IA.No.235 of

2014. Aggrieved over the same, the 1st defendant in the

suit has filed the present revision.

2.The case of the plaintiff is that they are the

descendants of Sivagangai Samasthanam and the suit property

is the plainitff’s ancestral hindu joint family property.

The plaintiff claims that there was a partition in the year

1975 among the family members and the suit property at

Kodaikanal was allotted to one Raja Kumari Rajalakshmi.

The said Raja Kumari Rajalakshmi has executed a sale deed

in favour of the 1st defendant on 27.03.1986 as Document No.

2/20

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

CRP(MD)No.2331 of 2022

404/1986. The property was sold exclusively by Raja Kumari

Rajalakshmi without any consent of other legal heirs, who

also have shares. Therefore, the respondent / plaintiff has

filed a suit in OS.No.58 of 2010 to declare the sale deed

in Document No.404/1986 as null and void and this suit in

OS.No.56 of 2014 for the relief of permanent injunction by

restraining the petitioner and other defendants from

disturbing their possession and enjoyment by way of

subdivision.

3.The Board of Directors of the 1st defendant company

passed a resolution dated 24.06.1984 permitting its

Managing Director, one Jamal K.Shah to sign the agreement

of sale for the sale of their properties at Ooty and

Kodaikanal, with their bankers, viz., Bank of Tokyo and

State Bank of Trivancore. Accordingly, the petitioner

company has entered into a sale agreement to sell the

property to another company namely Trans India Resorts Ltd

for a sum of Rs.2.70 crores. They also deposited the

original title deeds including the original power of

attorney with bank by creating an equitable mortgage.

The Trans India Resorts Ltd obtained a loan from the State

3/20

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

CRP(MD)No.2331 of 2022

Bank of Travancore for purchasing this property and also

transferred the sale amount to the petitioner company. The

Managing Director of the petitioner company also executed a

registered irrevocable power of attorney as Document No.

1111/1995 before the Joint District Registrar, Mumbai

authorising one Srinivasan as the power of attorney to

execute sale agreements and sale deeds on behalf of the

Managing Director.

4.The 1st defendant has filed IA.No.235 of 2014 in

OS.No.56 of 2014 before the District Munsif Cum Judicial

Magistrate Court No.1, Kodaikanal under Order III Rule 2

CPC,

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top