Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

V.Thangavelu vs T.Muruganantham

Madras High Court|12 September, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

C.S.No.106 of 2017 had been filed seeking recovery and permanent injunction.
2. Memo of Compromise has been filed by the plaintiff, stating that the suit has been settled with the 1st defendant. The suit against the other defendants namely the 2nd to 8th defendants, is not pressed and consequently dismissed against them.
3. However, the decree is passed in accordance with the compromise memo as against the 1st defendant.
4. The terms of memorandum of compromise are recorded which as follows;
"The plaintiff and the 1st defendant above named humbly submit as follows:
WHEREAS the plaintiff had paid, under an Agreement dated 05.12.2014 and at the request of the 1st defendant, a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs only) to the 2nd defendant out of which, the sum Rs.22,61,560/- was due and payable to the plaintiff; and WHEREAS the Defendants 1 and 2 with help of the Defendants 3 and 4 produced the picture titled Motta Siva Ketta Siva and sought to release it with the aid the of Defendants 5 to 8; and WHEREAS the plaintiff filed the comprehensive suti for the recovery of the amount due to him with interest totalling to the sum of Rs.34,88,570/-, together with future interest @ 26% p.a., from 11.12.2014 till the date of filing of the suit, from the Defendants 1 and 2; for permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 8, from releasing, distributing, exhibiting or exploiting the picture titled Motta Siva Ketta Siva (Tamil - colour) and for costs of the suti, etc., in which the 1st defendant had not entered appearance; and WHEREAS the plaintiff also filed an application in O.A.No.151 of 2017 for an Interim injunction restraining the defendants from releasing the said picture during the pendency of the main suit and also filed another application No.989/2017 against the defendants for a pro-order, both of which were dismissed on 09.03.2017 by a common order; and WHEREAS the plaintiff preferred two appeals in O.S.A.No.72 of 2017 and 73 of 2017 against the said common order which were admitted and notices were ordered by the Hon'ble 1st Bench and are pending; and WHEREAS on the advice of mutual friends and with a view to purchase peace, the plaintiff and the 1st defendant have settled the matter between them amicably and agreed to carry on business between them, have negotiated and arrived at the following terms of compromise.
NOW THIS MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE WITNESSES AS FOLLOWS:
1. The 1st defendant agreed to pay and the plaintiff agreed to receive, a sum of Rs.23,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs only) in full and final settlement of all the suit claims in C.S.No.106 of 2017 on the file of this Hon'ble Court.
2. The 1st defendant agreed to and shall, pay the amount of Rs.23,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs only) within 90 days from today.
3. In the event of the failure on the part of 1st defendant to pay the entire amount agreed herein, i.e., the aforesaid Rs.23,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs only), within the aforesaid period of 90 days from this date, the entire suit claim for money shall become payable immediately on the following day, with costs of the proceedings and grant of injunction as prayed for.
4. The plaintiff gives up the defendants 2 to 8 in the suit and agrees to withdraw the Appeals in O.S.A.No.72 of 2017 and 73 of 2017.
5. The parties agreed to present this memo of compromise in Court with a prayer to pass a decree in C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J rna/ksa terms of this compromise in the suit No.C.S.No.106 of 2017, as well as to withdraw the said two Appeals in O.S.A.No.72 of 2017 and 73 of 2017."
5. The memo of compromise is to form a part of decree. The memo of compromise has been signed by both the learned counsel for the plaintiff and 1st defendant and also plaintiff and 1st defendant.
6. The suit is decreed against the 1st defendant in terms of the memo of compromise and dismissed against the defendants-2 to 8.
12.09.2017 Index : Yes / No Web : Yes / No rna/ksa Judgment in C.S. No.106 of 2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

V.Thangavelu vs T.Muruganantham

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
12 September, 2017