Madras High Court
Sameer Kumar Sharma vs Ajit Kumar Sharma on 10 January, 2014
Author: M.Jaichandren
Bench: M.Jaichandren
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10-1-2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN C.S.No.41 of 1997 1. Sameer Kumar Sharma 2. Dipti Sharma 3. Minor Tapas Sharma rep. By mother and natural guardian Dipti Sharma .. Plaintiffs Versus 1. Ajit Kumar Sharma 2. Suryadevara Nagamani Mohini Kumar (deceased) 3. R.Mohan 4. Vijaya Radha Mohan 5. R.Manikandan 6. Rajan Verghese Chacko 7. Prakashchand Jain 8. Ganesan, Sub Registrar, Saidapet 9. P.Kalyani 10. K.Raghavendra Rao (Legal representatives of second defendant as per order in Appln.No.1227 of 1999) 11. Minor Praneet represented by father and natural guardian R.Mohan as the legal heir of 4th defendant as per order in A.No.3012 of 2001, dated 31.7.2001 .. Respondents. Prayer: Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of O.S.Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, praying for the reliefs as stated in the plaint in C.S.No.41 of 1997. For Plaintiffs : Mr.Satish Parasaran For defendants : Mr.K.Kumar (D2) Mr.C.Ramesh (D3) Ms.P.T.Asha (D6) for M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates Mr.C.A.Theagarajan (D4 & D7) Ms.Saraswathi Shivaraman Iyer Government Advocate (CS) (D8) JUDGMENT
This Civil Suit is filed praying that this court may be pleased to pass a judgment and decree as against the defendants as under:
a) for a declaration that the sale deeds dated 9.2.94, 25.2.94, 4.3.94, 4.3.94, 9.3.94, 9.3.94 and 11.3.94 executed by the first plaintiff in favour of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants are sham, nominal, illegal, invalid, inoperative and not binding upon the plaintiffs and consequently direct the defendants 2 to 5 to deliver vacant possession of the suit property on a day to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court along with the original title deeds of the schedule `A' mentioned property after duly cancelling the sale deeds/ agreements of sale/power of attorney.
b) Directing the defendants to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- per month to the plaintiffs as damages for use and occupation of the suit proeprty by defendants 2 to 5 from the date of the suit till the date of actual delivery.
c) for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants 2 to 5 or anyone claiming through them from alienating or encumbering the suit property by way of sale, mortgage, or development or otherwise except in accordance with law.
d) for a permanent injunction restraining the 4th defendant or her principal or anyone claiming through them from interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property situate at Flat No.L/4, 4th Floor, Paras Apartments, Shanthi Colony, 11, Jeevarathna Nagar, Adyar, Madras 600 020, till the delivery of `A' schedule property.
e) directing the defendants 2 to 4 and 7th defendant to return the `B' schedule articles or the value thereof namely Rs.11 lakhs.
f) for awarding the costs of the suit
g) grant such further or other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper and thus render justice."
2. This civil suit was referred for mediation to the Tamil Nadu Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Madras, by the order of this Court, dated 11.1.2011.
3. A communication, dated 24.2.2011, of the Tamil Nadu Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Madras, enclosing a copy of its Mediation Report, dated 24.2.2011, has been received, and in the said Mediation Report, it is stated as follows:-
"Both the parties appeared before the Centre along with their Counsel. Matter has been settled between them as per the terms cited in the Compromise enclosed. Hence the matter is sent back to the Hon'ble Court."
4. As the parties have arrived at a settlement in terms of the Memo of Compromise, dated 24.2.2011, and the Additional Joint Memo of Compromise, dated 27.4.2011, this petition is listed for passing orders in terms of the said Memo of Compromise and Additional Joint Memo of Compromise.
5. The Memo of Compromise, dated 24.2.2011, signed by the parties and the counsels appearing for the plantiffs and the third defendant, reads as follows:-
"Memo of Compromise entered into between the plaintiffs and the third defendant
1. The parties have amicably resolved all their disputes and are entering into this Memo of Compromise and pray that the Hon'ble Court record the same and dispose of the suit in terms of the Memo of Compromise.
2. The 3rd Defendant agrees to pay the Plaintiffs a sum of Rs.2,50,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crorers and Fifty Lakhs only) in full and final settlement of all the claims made by the Plaintiffs against the Defendants, including the properties described in Schedules A and B to the Plaint
3. The 3rd Defendant agrees to pay the said sum of Rs.2,50,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores and Fifty Lakhs only) to the Plaintiffs within a period of two months from the date of recording of this Memo of Compromise by the Hon'ble Corut and in any event, not later than 27.4.2011, in the following manner a. Rs.84,00,000/- (Eighty Four Lakhs) to the 1st plaintiff b. Rs.83,00,000/- (Eighty Three Lakhs) to the 2nd plaintiff c. Rs.83,00,000/- (Eighty Three Lakhs) to the 3rd plaintiff
4. On payment of the amount mentioned in Clause 2 above, the Plaintiffs shall not have any manner of claim, right, title or interest whatsoever against the defendants and against the properties morefully described in Schedules A and B to the Plaint. However, it is agreed that in the event of default in payment as mentioned above, the plaintiffs will be entitled to execute the decree passed in terms of this Memorandum of Compromise, for Rs.2,500,00,000/-
5. The Plaintiffs confirms and ratifies the following Sale deeds executed by the 1st Plaintiff in favour of the Defendants 2 to 4, in view of the Payment made by the 3rd defendant to the Plaintiffs as stated above.
Sl.No. Date of Sale Deed Document No. and in favour of 1 9294 204/94 in favour of R.Mohan (3rd Defendant) 2 25.02.1994 344/94 in favour of Vijaya Radha Mohan (4th Defendant) 3 4394 402/94 in favour of R.Mohan (3rd Defendant) 4 4394 403/94 in favour of Suryadevara Nagamani Mohini Kumari (2nd Defendant) 5 9394 438/94 in favour of Vijaya Radha Mohan (4th Defendant) 6 9394 439/94 in favour of R.Mohan (3rd Defendant) 7 11394 457/94 in favour of Suryadevara Nagamani Mohini Kumar (2nd Defendant)
6. In view of the settlement now reached between the parties herein, the Plaintiffs agree and undertake not to oppose the Appeals, one filed by the 3rd defendant and another appeal filed by the Tenant of the A-Schedule Property M/s.M.P.L Parts and Services Ltd, now pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, against the order made by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in the Contempt Petition."
6. The Additional Joint Memo of Compromise, dated 27.4.2011, signed by the parties and the counsels appearing for the plantiffs and the third defendant, reads as follows:-
"Additional Joint Memo of Compromise entered into between the plaintiffs and 3rd defendant
1. The Parties viz. The Plaintiffs and the 3rd Defendant, jointly agree that the time for making payment mentioned in the Memorandum of Compromise dated 24.2.2011, which expires on 27th April, 2011, may be extended further up to 30th June 2011.
2. The 3rd Defendant agrees to pay interest on 2,50,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores and Fifty Lakhs only) at the rate of 11% per annum from 27th April 2011 till date of payment.
3. The parties agree that the other terms contained in the Memorandum of Compromise dated 24.2.2011 remain unchanged."
7. Today when the matter has been taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of both parties had filed a memo to the following effect:
"Memo Filed by the Plaintiffs
1. The plaintiffs herein state that they have settled all the disputes and differences which are the subject matter of the present suit, by entering into a memorandum of compromise with the third defendant herein.
2. The plaintiffs further state that since no reliefs survives against the defendants 1, 2 and 4 to 11 and since all disputes have been settled with the third defendant, the present suit may be dismissed against all the defendants other than the third defendant.
It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dismiss the suit in C.S.No.41 of 1997 against Defendant 1, 2 and 4 to 11 and pass a decree in terms of Memorandum of Compromise dated 24.2.2011 and the Additional Memorandum of Compromise dated 27.4.2011 entered into between the plaintiffs and third defendant and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and thus render justice."
8. In terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, which is recorded under the Memo of Compromise, dated 24.2.2011, Joint Memo of Compromise, dated 27.4.2011 and the Memo filed by the plaintiffs, dated 10.1.2014, this Civil Suit is decreed, recording the terms stated therein . The terms of the Memo of Compromise, dated 24.2.2011, Joint Memo of Compromise, dated 27.4.2011 and the Memo filed by the plaintiffs, dated 10.1.2014, shall form part of the decree. The plaintiffs are entitled to the refund of entire court fee. No costs. The Registry is directed to return the original papers, if any, on the request made by the parties, after obtaining necessary endorsements.
Index:Yes/No 10-1-2014 Internet:Yes/No csh M.JAICHANDREN,J.
csh C.S.No.41 of 1997 10-1-2014