BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Thursday, the Fifteenth day of December Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.RAJASURIA AS(MD) No.599 of 2011 1 RUKMANI 2 R.SIVAKUMAR 3 R.CHENTHIL KUMAR :APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS 1 TO 3 -Vs- T.PAINTHAMIL KUMARAN @ TAMILAN :RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF Appeal against the Judgment and Decree of the District Judge, Kanyakumari in Original Suit No.39 of 2004, dated 24.3.2007, this appeal coming on for hearing on this day upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decrees of the Lower Appellate Court and the court of first instance and the material papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.M.Kalifullah, Advocate for the Appellants and of Mr.Belmont S.Swamy, Advocate for the Respondent and the court made the following order: Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing under the caption “for being mentioned”, the learned counsel appearing on either side in unison would submit that the cost awarded by this court was paid by the appellants to the respondent somewhat belatedly, for which the learned counsel for the respondent is having no objection. 2.As such, it is recorded and the delay in complying with the order of this court dated 21.11.2011 is condoned. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (T&P) / TRUE COPY / Sub Assistant Registrar TO: THE DISTRICT JUDGE, KANYAKUMARI. ORDER AS(MD) No.599 of 2011 Date :15/12/2011 GIVING DIRECTIONS ETC AS STATED WITHIN. RP/22.12.2011/1P/2C. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/