SA No. 1616 of 2011 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN SA No. 1616 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 1. R.M.Subramanian (Died) 2. Kannammal 3. Senthilkumar (Sole appellant died, Appellants 2 and 3 brought on record as LRs of the deceased sole appellant vide court order dated 30/07/2024 made in CMP Nos.16371 to 16373 of 2022) ..Appellants Vs 1. Nallasamy 2. R.M.Ponnusamy (died) 3. Ponmani 4. Rega 5. Menaka (R2 died, RR3 to 5 are brought on record as LRs of the deceased R2 vide court order dated 12/12/2025 made in CMP.Nos.4685, 4694 and 4695 of 2025) ..Respondents Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of CPC against the judgment and decree of the Principal District Judge, Erode in A.S.No.59 of 2010 dated 09.04.2011, confirming the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Dharapuram in O.S.No.130 of 2002 dated 22.02.2010. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis SA No. 1616 of 2011 __________ Page2 of 4 For Appellants: Mr.D.Rameshkumar For R1: Mr.V.Regunathan JUDGMENT By order dated 31.07.2025, this court had referred the issue raised in the Second Appeal to be examined by the Mediation and Conciliation Centre to bring about an amicable settlement among the parties. 2. A report had been received from the Mediation and Conciliation Centre dated 08.09.2025, indicating the settlement reached among the parties. The Mediation had been attended by the second appellant Kannammal, wife of the deceased first appellant and also by the third respondent Ponmani and by the first respondent Nallasamy. 3. This court had, on 19.12.2025, wanted to examine the parties to verify their consensus to the terms arrived during the mediation process. Accordingly, today, first respondent Thiru.Nallasamy and the third respondent Ponmani are present in this court. The second appellant Kannammal and her son Thiru.Senthilkumar appeared through video conferencing. The learned counsel for the appellant is also present and identified them. 4. Both the parties had unanimously stated that they attended the mediation proceedings and had come to an amicable settlement. 5. The second appeal stands disposed of in accordance with the mediation settlement report dated 08.09.2025. the judgment and decree of the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis SA No. 1616 of 2011 __________ Page3 of 4 Trial Court and the first appellate court are set aside since the parties had entered into a compromise before this court. 6. It is with much pleasure that it is noted that the parties had settled among themselves and they have no further claims or demands against each other. This would put an end to all the litigations among them. The mediation report shall form part of the decree to be passed by this court. No order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 27-02-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ssk To 1. Principal District Judge, Erode 2. Subordinate Judge, Dharapuram https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis SA No. 1616 of 2011 __________ Page4 of 4 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J. ssk SA No. 1616 of 2011 27-02-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis