M v. Parameswarn v Balamani
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Kerala dismissed Regular Second Appeal RSA No. 286 of 2015 for default, as the appellant failed to submit any instructions for prosecution on the date of hearing.
What did the court decide?
Regular Second Appeal dismissed for default; all pending interlocutory applications dismissed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL
WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/18TH KARTHIKA, 1938
RSA.No. 286 of 2015 (A)
IA 935/2013 IN AS 121/2013 OF DISTRICT COURT, MANJERI. IA 4305/2010 IN OS 200/2008 OF SUB COURT, TIRUR
APPELLANT(S)/APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT :
M V PARAMESWARN
S/O. MUNDAM VALAPPIL KRISHNAN, KRIPA AUTO WORKS,
NEAR VIKAS PETROL PUMP, HADAPSAR, PUNE-28.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI (SR.) SRI.VINOD RAVINDRANATH SRI.T.SIVADASAN SRI.SAJU.S.A SMT.MEENA.A. SRI.K.C.KIRAN SRI.M.DEVESH
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 AND 3:
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Regular Second Appeal should be dismissed for default due to lack of instructions from the appellant.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
M.V. Parameswarn
- respondent
Balamani
- respondent
Vimala
- respondent
Mundam Valappil Sekharan
- respondent
M.V. Surehkumar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court