2024-02-08
Subject:
O R D E R
After going by the Schedule attached to the plaint, the suit property contained 70 items out of which the dispute is only with respect to Item Nos. 09 and 12. The submission made by Mr. V. Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants as also the learned counsel appearing for the respondents would reveal the desire of the parties to try to settle the matter among themselves. In that view of the matter, the parties are permitted to try to settle the dispute among themselves.
List on 06.03.2024.
(VIJAY KUMAR) (MATHEW ABRAHAM) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.102 COURT NO.13 SECTION XII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal Nos.11393-11394/2011 P. VELAYUTHAM AND ORS. & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS P. GANESAN AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 2865/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 2864/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date : 08-02-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL For Appellant(s) Mr. V. Prabhakar, Sr. Adv.
Mr. M.A. Chinnasamy, Adv.
Ms. Jyoti Parashar, Adv. Mr. M. Chinnadurai, Adv. Mr. N.J. Rachandar, Adv.
Mrs. Revathy Raghavan, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Shoba Ramamurthy, Adv.
Mr. G. Ananda Selvam, Adv.
Mr. Mayilsamy K., Adv.
Mr. Sanchit Maheshwari, Adv.
Mr. Shilp Vinor, Adv.
Mr. Vincy George, Adv.
Mr. Gokulakrishnan S.R., Adv.
Mr. Ajay Subhash B., Adv.
Ms. Lakshmi Ramamurthy, AOR Mr. R. Sathish, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
After going by the Schedule attached to the plaint, the suit property contained 70 items out of which the dispute is only with respect to Item Nos. 09 and 12. The submission made by Mr. V. Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants as also the learned counsel appearing for the respondents would reveal the desire of the parties to try to settle the matter among themselves. In that view of the matter, the parties are permitted to try to settle the dispute among themselves.
List on 06.02.2024.
(VIJAY KUMAR) (MATHEW ABRAHAM) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.102 COURT NO.13 SECTION XII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal Nos.11393-11394/2011 P. VELAYUTHAM AND ORS. & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS P. GANESAN AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 2865/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 2864/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date : 08-02-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL For Appellant(s) Mr. V. Prabhakar, Sr. Adv.
Mr. M.A. Chinnasamy, Adv.
Ms. Jyoti Parashar, Adv. Mr. M. Chinnadurai, Adv. Mr. N.J. Rachandar, Adv.
Mrs. Revathy Raghavan, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Shoba Ramamurthy, Adv.
Mr. G. Ananda Selvam, Adv.
Mr. Mayilsamy K., Adv.
Mr. Sanchit Maheshwari, Adv.
Mr. Shilp Vinor, Adv.
Mr. Vincy George, Adv.
Mr. Gokulakrishnan S.R., Adv.
Mr. Ajay Subhash B., Adv.
Ms. Lakshmi Ramamurthy, AOR Mr. R. Sathish, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
After going by the Schedule attached to the plaint, the suit property contained 70 items out of which the dispute is only with respect to Item Nos. 09 and 12. The submission made by Mr. V. Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants as also the learned counsel appearing for the respondents would reveal the desire of the parties to try to settle the matter among themselves. In that view of the matter, the parties are permitted to try to settle the dispute among themselves.
List on 06.02.2024.
(VIJAY KUMAR) (MATHEW ABRAHAM) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
Thane Court Rejects Application to Dismiss Defamation Suit Against Digvijaya Singh Over RSS Remarks: Order VII Rule 11 CPC
06 Feb 2026
Ministry Revises Fees for Central Government Counsel Effective 2026
06 Feb 2026
Temporary Re-Employment Not Entitling Ex-Serviceman to Civil Pension: Punjab & Haryana HC
06 Feb 2026
High Courts Confirm Only 10% of Death Sentences Since 2016
06 Feb 2026
Finality in IPS Cadre Allocation Cannot Be Reopened After Decades: Supreme Court
06 Feb 2026
Patna HC Quashes Cognizance Against Minister Sans Assault Allegations
06 Feb 2026
Supreme Court Directs Trial Courts to Inform Accused of Legal Aid Rights Before Witness Examination
07 Feb 2026
Law Ministry Reveals 73% Upper Caste Judges Since 2021
07 Feb 2026
Dwivedi: British Geopolitics Created Pakistan, Not Jinnah
07 Feb 2026
The burden of proving insanity, the presumption of sanity, and the principle of approbate and reprobate were the central legal points established in the judgment.
A party cannot challenge a compromise decree through a separate suit due to the restrictions imposed by Order 23 Rule 3-A of the Civil Procedure Code.
The bar under Order XXIII Rule 3A of the CPC does not apply to a stranger to the compromise, and the plea of limitation is a mixed question of fact and law to be determined after evidence has been le....
Pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act is mandatory; however, if mediation has occurred prior to suit registration, further mediation is not required.
A preliminary decree in partition cases cannot be reopened during final decree proceedings, ensuring established determinations are upheld.
Disputed factual issues in a partition suit prevent legal questions from being decided as preliminary issues under Order XIV Rule 2(2) of the CPC.
The court upheld the compromise order, finding no evidence of coercion, and directed the respondent to execute a sale deed for the entire property after regularisation.
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.