Page 1

Non-Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA                    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.14122-14123 OF 2015 (arising out of S.L.P.(Civil) Nos.14381-14382 of 2014)

  SUSANA RANI DAVID & ANR.          ... APPELLANT(S)    

               VS.

  ESTHER JASPHER SWAMINATHAN & ORS.     ... RESPONDENT(S)

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.14124-14125 OF 2015 (arising out of S.L.P.(Civil) Nos.22795-22796 of 2014)

J U D G M E N T

Anil R. Dave, J.

1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Leave granted. 3. Upon perusal of the impugned judgment and the facts  pertaining to the case, we find that the main dispute in the  appeals is only with regard to the share of defendant No.4- Victoria Srinivasan. 4. In  the  course  of  hearing  of  these  appeals,  the  appellants had relied upon a sale deed dated 29th June, 2001  executed by defendant No.4, by virtue of which some property  had  been  sold  by  her.  The  said  document  has  not  been  exhibited before any court.  The said sale deed is permitted  

1

Page 2

to be placed on record so that it may be looked into by the  High Court and consider its effects on the compromise deed  entered into among some of the parties. 5. In these cicumstances, we dispose of these appeals with  a direction that a review application shall be filed by the  appellants within four weeks from today before the High Court  and the High Court shall permit the appellants to do the  needful to get the said document exhibited.  6. The High Court shall consider the effect of the said  sale  deed  after  hearing  the  concerned  paties  and  if  necessary,  may  modify  the  impugned  judgement  and  pass  appropriate order in accordance with law. 7. It  may  further  be  noted  that  as  shares  of  other  defendants have been purchased by defendant No.8, the amount,  if any,  which might become payable to defendant No.4 shall  be paid by defendant No.8.  8. It is also agreed among the parties during the course  of hearing of these appeals that the compromise entered into  among  the  defendants  which  has  been  referred  to  in  the  impugned judgment will not get affected by this order except  qua defendant No.4 and the same shall be considered to be a  valid  compromise  qua  others  who  have  not  disputed  it.  Therefore, the impugned order, to the extent it nullifies the  compromise, is set aside.  The appeals are allowed to the  extent that the compromise to which defendant No.4 was not a  party, shall remain as it is.

2

Page 3

9. The registry of the High Court will fix the date for  hearing of the review application in the month of February,  2016.   Only  defendant  Nos.  4,  8  and  9  or  their  representatives shall be heard by the High Court. 11. Pending applications stand disposed of. 12. There shall be no order as to costs.

       ..............J.  [ANIL R. DAVE]  

..................J. [ADARSH KUMAR GOEL]  

New Delhi; 7th December, 2015.

3

Page 4

ITEM NO.6               COURT NO.2               SECTION XII                S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.  14381-14382/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 20/12/2013  in AN Nos. 517/1993 and 685/1993 passed by the High Court Of  Judicature at Madras) SUSANA RANI DAVID & ANR.                           Petitioner(s)                                 VERSUS ESTHER JASPHER SWANINATHAN & ORS.                  Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for exemption from filing affidavit) WITH SLP(C) No. 22795-22796/2014 (With appln.(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and Interim Relief  and Office Report)   Date : 07/12/2015 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM :           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL For Petitioner(s) Mr. G.Umapathy,Adv.

Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma,Adv. Mr. Kapil Sibal,Sr.Adv. Mr. Parag P.Tripathi,Sr.Adv. Mr. A. V. Rangam,Adv. Mr. Buddy A.Ranganadhan,Adv. Mr. D.V. Raghu Vamsy,Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. S.Guru Krishna Kumar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Senthil Jagadeesan,Adv. Mr. Govind Manoharan,Adv. Ms. Shruti Iyer,Adv. Ms. Suchitra Kumbhat,Adv. Mr. R.Balasubramanian,Sr.Adv. Mr. V.Balachandran,Adv. Mr. B.Karunakaran,Adv. Mr. A.Lakshminarayanan,Adv. For M/s. KSN & Co.,Advs.

4

Page 5

                         UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following                              O R D E R

Leave granted. The appeals are allowed in terms of the non-reportable  

judgement.  Pending applications stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.   

(Anita Malhotra)          (Sneh Bala Mehra)      Court Master         Assistant Registrar

(Non-reportable judgment is placed on the file.)

5