Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 98156 (MAD)

L. Prabhakaran v. K. Sundaran

AS/966/2024 · 2025-07-30

J Nisha Banu, M Jothiraman

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

A.S.No.966 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-07-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN AS No. 966 of 2024 1. L. Prabhakaran S/o. Mr. J. Lakshmipathi, Surya Flats, 33/44A, Ramakrishnan Street, Perambur, Chennai 11. Appellant(s) Vs 1. K. Sundaran S/o. K. Narayanan, 16A/20, M.M.T.C. Colony, 2nd Main road, Nanganallur, Chennai 61. Respondent(s) PRAYER Appeal suit filed under Section 96 CpC r/w Order XLI Rule 1 of CPC to allow the appeal and modify the decree the Judgement and decree dated 12.06.2024 passed in OS No.208 of 2020 by the Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu. For Appellant(s): K.Manikandan For Respondent(s): M/s. V.Lokesh Kumar- https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A.S.No.966 of 2024 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by J.Nisha Banu J.) This appeal has been filed, challenging the decree and judgment passed by he learned Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu in O.S.No.208 of 2020, dated 12.06.2024. 2. The appellant herein filed the above said suit seeking direction to the respondent herein to pay a sum of Rs.71,86,664/- together with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. on the advance amount of Rs.50,00,000/- and to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as liquidated damages and also permanent injunction restraining the respondent and his men from alienating the suit schedule property. 3. The above said suit was partly allowed, directing the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of sale agreement till the date of decree and thereafter 6% p.a. till the date of realization. In so far as the other prayers are concerned, the suit was dismissed. Challenging the said decree and judgment, the appellant/plaintiff has filed the present appeal suit. 4. Today, when the matter is listed for hearing, the appellant/ plaintiff as well as the respondent/defendant have filed a joint memo of compromise, dated 28.07.2025, having signed by them and their respective counsel. In the said compromise memo, the respondent/defendant agreed to pay a sum of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A.S.No.966 of 2024 Rs.85,00,000/- to the appellant/plaintiff as a full and final settlement of the claim and the appellant/plaintiff has agreed to receive the said amount. Towards the payment of the above said amount, the respondent/defendant has issued five demands drafts in favour of the appellant/plaintiff, amount and date as described in the compromise memo. Upon tender of the above said demand drafts by the respondent/defendant, the appellant/plaintiff is agreed to withdraw this appeal suit as fully settled out of court and also agreed to file necessary application, to raise the attachment order dated 08.12.2022 on the immovable property, as described in the compromise memo. 5. In view of the above, the above joint compromise memo dated 28.07.2025 is recorded and the appeal is disposed of, in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties. The joint memo of compromise shall form part and parcel of this decree. The appellant is entitled to refund of court fee, as per rules. (J.NISHA BANU J.) (M.JOTHIRAMAN J.) 30-07-2025 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No MST https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A.S.No.966 of 2024 To 1.K. Sundaran S/o. K. Narayanan, 16A/20, M.M.T.C. Colony, 2nd Main road, Nanganallur, Chennai 61. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A.S.No.966 of 2024 J.NISHA BANU J. AND M.JOTHIRAMAN J. MST AS No. 966 of 2024 30.07.2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis