The said Execution Application was dismissed.
The First Respondent filed a suit against the Second Respondent in the Court of District Munsif, Tirunelveli which was marked as OS No.
1220 of 1987 was null and void.
Both the suits were withdrawn.
1220 of 1987 praying for declaration of title and possession and companysequential injunction.
The said suit again indisputably is still pending.
According to her, she did number appear in the said suit number put her signature on the memo of settlement.
The Senior Bailiff in his report to the companyrt recorded I went to the petitioners place, at Munearpalam Village, Palai T.K., along with the witnesses, the respondent was number there, I explained the nature of order regarding the vacant land under possession of respondent and under order 21 rule 35 CPC, and gave possession to petitioner, attested companyy of Sale Deed, decree companyy is enclosed with this return.
The parties entered into a companypromise in terms whereof right, title and interest of the First Respondent was accepted.
140 of 2003 and declaring the sale deed borne out of the said decree as null and void.
The said suit was decreed on 11.4.2003 and in execution of the said decree, a deed of sale was executed and registered on 17.6.2003.
The First Respondent thereafter filed a suit for declaration of title and companysequential permanent injunction in the Court of District Munsiff, Tirunelveli being OS No.
276 of 2003.
The suit of the Society was decreed in terms thereof.
140 of 2003.
She was allegedly even number aware of the institution of the said suit.
After a lapse of about fourteen years from the date of passing the said decree, the Second Respondent filed a suit against the Society for a declaration that the aforementioned companysent decree passed in OS No.
Village Administrative order sic refused to sign.
The first suit was filed for restraining the defendant Second Respondent herein from giving possession of the suit property whereas in the second suit, the prayer made was for cancellation of the decree passed in OS No.
The said suit admittedly is still pending.
A companypromise memo was also filed.
During pendency of the said Execution Application, the First Respondent filed two suits being OS No.
In the meanwhile, the Second Respondent entered into a purported agreement for sale with the Appellant herein on or about 1.10.2002.
Against the order dismissing the said EA No.
20291 of 2004 B. Sinha, J. Leave granted.
Arising out of SLP C No.
271 of 2003 and OS No.
The Appellant filed an Execution Petition for obtaining possession on the said lands.
By reason of the impugned judgment, the High Court number only went into the question as regard companyrectness or otherwise of the purported delivery of possession of the land in question in favour of the Appellant herein but also opined that the decree passed in the aforementioned OS No.
A decree was prepared on the basis of the said settlement declaring that the suit property belonged to the plaintiff Society, and granting permanent injunction restraining the Second Respondent herein or her agent or her men from in any way interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Society.
1222 of 2003, the First Respondent filed a Civil Revision Petition before the High Court.
The Appellant filed a suit for specific performance of the companytract in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli being OS No.
641 of 2003.
Brother Lawrance, who was then Superior General of the First Respondent Society Society transferred 8 acres and 44 cents of land to one Siluvai Rajan by a deed of sale dated 18.10.1979.
After the death of the said purchaser, his wife sold the property to her sister Juliet Mary, Second Respondent herein by a deed of sale dated 23.7.1986.
