Madras High Court
Kumari. Baghayavathi vs Lakshmikanthammal (Deceased) on 13 March, 2015
Author: R.Subbiah
Bench: R.Subbiah
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 13.03.2015 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH C.S.No.178 of 1981 and A.No.1528 of 2014 Kumari. Baghayavathi .. Plaintiff vs 1. Lakshmikanthammal (Deceased) 2. Rajalakshmi Ammal (Deceased) 3. Sarojini (recorded as LR of deceased first defendant) 4. S.Gajalakshmi .. Defendants For Plaintiff : Mr. A.Gowthaman For Defendants : Mr.K.Venkataraman for D3 Mr.K.Chockalingam for D4 J U D G M E N T
Heard both the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff as well as the defendants.
2. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the respective parties submitted that the matter was compromised between the parties and they have also filed memo of compromise signed by both the parties along with their respective counsel and requested the Court to pass a decree, in terms of the memo of compromise filed by both the parties.
3. The memo of compromise reads as follows :
"1. The plaintiff filed a Civil Suit praying before this Hon'ble Court to pass judgment and decree against the defendants towards suit schedule mentioned properties.
2. This suit along with the applications given below came before this Hon'ble Court and this Hon'ble Court passed a fresh preliminary decree holding that applicant / plaintiff is entitled to get 1/4th share in Ambattur house property bearing No.3, Sarangapani Street, Ambattur, Madras-53, more fully set out as item No.2. In schedule A and 1/8th share in respect of the partnership business run in the name and style of M/s. Srinivasalu Naidu and Company (now known as Multi Port Terminal) more fully set out as item No.1 in the schedule B herein.3. A.No.1886 of 2012
Similarly, the applicant Smt.S.Gajalakshmi in the above application is entitled to 1/4th share in Ambattur house property, bearing No.3, Sarangapani Street, Ambattur, Madras-53, more fully set out as item No.2, in schedule A and 1/8th share in respect of the partnership business run in the name and style of M/s. Srinivasalu Naidu and Company (Known as Multi Port Terminal) more fully set out as item No.1 in the schedule B herein.4. A.No.1887 of 2012
The applicant / 4th defendant is permitted to pay necessary court fees for relief of allotment of 5/16th share in the house property bearing No.3, Sarangapani Street, Ambattur-53, more fully set out as item -2 in schedule A and 5/32th share in respect of the property, viz., the partnership business running under the name and style of M/s. Srinivasalu Naidu and Company (now known as Multi Port Terminal) more fully set out as item No.1 in the schedule B of the suit property.
5. It is submitted that after the death of Rajalakshmi ammal (D2) died pending the suit, her share has been devolved on the plaintiff and the 4th defendant equally, hence, after the development of the share to the plaintiff and the 4th defendant, the parties are entitled to get as follows :
S.No. Item 2 in 'A' Item 1 in 'B' 1. Plaintiff 1/4+1/16 =5/16 1/8+1/32=5/32 2. 1st defendant 1/8 1/16 3. 3rd defendant 1/4 1/8 4. 4th defendant 1/4+1/16=5/16 1/8+1/32=5/32 Total 1 share 1/2 share
6. It is submitted that the 4th defendant filed an application by No.1528 of 2014, based on the fresh preliminary decree to appoint an Advocate-Commissioner to visit the suit schedule properties and to file a report to propose the division to the immovable properties in respect of item No.2, schedule A 5/16 share situated at No.3, Sarangapani Street, Krishnapuram, Ambattur, Madras-53 and in respect of item No.1 in the schedule B 5/32nd share in the business run in the name style M/s. Srinivasulu Naidu and Company (now known as Multiport Terminal) in terms of fresh preliminary decree, dated 27.04.2012 passed by this Hon'ble Court in A.No.1886 of 2012 in C.S.No.178 of 1981.
7. It is submitted pending the Application No.1528 of 2014, it is thought fit by the parties plaintiff and the 3rd and 4th defendants to divide the item No.2 as passed by this Hon'ble Court in the fresh preliminary decree as given herein.
8. It is submitted that in item 1 in B schedule property the partnership business running under the name style of M/s. Srinivasulu Naidu and Company (now known as Multi Port Terminal), it is allotted 5/32 (1/8th + 1/32) to the plaintiff and 4th defendant each and 1/16th and 1/8th to the 1st and 3rd defendant respectively, now since 1st defendant Lakshmi kanthammal deceased, the 1/16th share will devolve upon her only heir the 3rd defendant Smt.Sarojini and become 1/16 + 1/8 = 5/24. It is further submitted in the common interest to put quietus to the very long pending issues.
9. Further, it is amicably decided an one lump sum amount of Rs.13,00,000/- (Rupees Thirteen lakhs only) to be paid by the 3rd defendant, Smt. Sarojini and to leave the name style M/s. Srinivasalu Naidu and Company (Now known as Multi Port Terminal) and the leave the company to be run by the aforesaid 3rd defendant and the same will be acknowledge by the respective parties. The 3rd defendant is entitled to enjoy the property as his own absolute property and shall make mutation of names wherever necessary with help of this joint memorandum.
10. It is though fit to sell the item 2 in A schedule property, since it is practically difficult to divide by metes and bounds and a prospective buyer with a fair price will be identified with the knowledge and consent of either side parties will be sold and the aforesaid agreed proceeds will be divided in accordance to the preliminary decree awarded by this Court and from such proceeds an agreed sum of Rs.13,00,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Lakhs only) towards the item 1 in B schedule property will be paid half proceeds each equally to the plaintiff and the 4th defendant.
11. The marked and unmarked documents by the 3rd defendant shall be returned to her and the applicant / 4th defendant undertakes to withdraw the application No.1528 of 2014 in C.S.No.178 of 1981 filed for appointment of Advocate-Commissioner, in view of this joint compromise memo.
12. It is therefore agreed that all the above named parties should bear their own costs in the suit and other respective costs if any and as per the final decree to be passed and in the strength of the compromise memo both the parties shall abide by the conditions as per the memo, and the final decree may be passed in view of this Joint compromise memo."
4. In the result, the final decree is passed in terms of the joint memo of compromise. The memo of compromise shall form part of the decree. Consequently, connected application is closed. There is no order as to costs.
The Registry is directed to return the unmarked documents. So far as the marked documents are concerned, the same shall be returned, after substituting the same with the certified copies.
13.03.2015 tsvn R.SUBBIAH, J tsvn C.S.No.178 of 1981 13-03-2015