Supreme Court - Daily Orders
M Marimuthu vs G.Sivashanmugam on 8 April, 2026
1
ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.7 SECTION XII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 27249-
27250/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03-07-2025
in AS No. 205/2022 03-07-2025 in AS No. 517/2022 passed by the High
Court of Judicature at Madras]
M MARIMUTHU & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
G.SIVASHANMUGAM & ORS. Respondent(s)
[TO BE TAKEN UP AT THE TOP OF THE BOARD]
IA No. 239983/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 35371/2026 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES
Date : 08-04-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ninad Laud, Adv.
Mr. Guruprasad Naik, Adv.
Mr. Gokula Krishnan T, Adv.
Mr. Gajendra Singh Negi, Adv.
Mr. Dcosta Ivo Manuel Simon, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Y. Raja Gopala Rao, AOR
Mr. Saaketh Kasibhatla, Adv.
Mr. Arsh Khan, AOR
Mr. Jayanth Muth Raj, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. Malavika Jayanth, AOR
Ms. V Swetha, Adv.
Mr. B. Karunakaran, AOR
Mr. Dharun Lakshman, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Ms. Rao Vishwaja, AOR
Digitally signed by
SWETA BALODI
Date: 2026.04.10
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
16:16:00 IST
Reason:
O R D E R
1. The respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 respectively instituted Original 2 Suit No.380/2008 in the Court of the Principal District Judge, Chengleput. In the suit, the plaintiffs prayed for the following reliefs:-
a) For preliminary decree for partition of the Plaintiffs 3/12 share in the suit schedule properties.
b) For final decree allotment of the Plaintiffs share in the suit schedule property by metes and bounds by appointing an Advocate Commissioner to provide proper share from and out of the suit schedule property.
c) For directing the defendants to render true and proper accounts for the Plaintiffs mesne profits and also to pay Plaintiffs share therein by appointing an advocate commissioner to ascertaining the same
d) For costs
e) For such further or other relief as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and render justice
f) To declare the Settlement Deed executed by 1st Defendant to and in favour of 3 to 5 B.Thirugnanasambandan, B.Santhalingam and B.Sundaresan on 12.10.2007 registered as Doc.No.9581/2007 at Sub-Registrar Office Tambaram is null and void and not binding on the Plaintiffs.
g) To declare the sale Deed executed by 1st Defendant to and in favour of 10th Defendant Mrs.P.Parvathy on 2.11.2000 registered as Doc.No.2477/2001 at Sub-Registrar Office at Pallavaram is null and void and not binding on the Plaintiff.
h) To declare the Sale Deed executed by 1st Defendant to and in favour of 11th and 12th Defendants Mrs.Samundeeswari and Vijayarani on 2.11.2000 registered as Doc.No.2478/2001 at Sub-Registrar Office at Pallavaram is null and void and not binding on the Plaintiffs.3
i) To declare the sale deed executed by 1st Defendant to and in favour of 13th Defendant G.Sivasankaran on 2.11.2000 registered as Doc. No.2479/2001 at Sub-Registrar Office at Pallavaram is null and void and not binding on the Plaintiffs,
j) To declare the Sale Deed executed by 1st Defendant to and in favour of 8th Defendant A.Karthik on 5.11.2001 registered as a Doc.No.580/2002 at Sub-Registrar office at Pallavaram is null and void and not binding the Plaintiffs
k) To declare the Sale Deed executed by 1st Defendant to and in favour of 14th Defendant P.Arumugam on 17.3.2003 registered as Doc.No.942/2003 at Sub Registrar Office at Pallavaram is null and void and not binding on the Plaintiffs
l) To declare the Sale Deed executed by 1st Defendant to and in favour of 8th Defendant A.Karthik on 2.11.2000 registered as a Doc.No.3553/2000 at Sub Registrar Office at Pallavaram is null and void and not binding on the Plaintiff.
m) To declare the Sale Deed executed by 1st Defendant to and in favour of 15th Defendant K.K.Murthy on 24.11.2003 registered as a Doc.No.3831/2003 at Sub Registrar Office at Pallavaram is null and void and not binding on the Plaintiffs.
n) To declare the Sale Deed executed by 1st Defendant to and in favour of 16th Defendant M.Marimuthu on 27.11.2006 under a Doc.
No. 6341/2006 at Sub Registrar, Office at Pallavaram is null and void and not binding the Plaintiffs.”
2. The petitioners before us are the legal heirs of the original defendant Nos.8 and 14 respectively.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that there have been some developments in the present litigation. 4 He brought to our notice that a settlement has been arrived at between the petitioners herein with the respondent Nos.1, 2, 3, 10 and 12 respectively. According to him, by way of a settlement, three sale deeds have been validated in favour of the petitioners.
4. We take the aforesaid development on record. The matter is not fully settled. It will be in the fitness of things, and in the interest of all the parties, if they are able to resolve the entire dispute. For the present, post these matters in the month of August, 2026.
(SWETA BALODI) (POOJA SHARMA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)