The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution as the appellants and their counsel were absent without representation; defects were not cured by taking steps.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
THURSDAY ,THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1940
RSA.No. 69 of 2005(G)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04-12-2004 IN A.S 35/2003 of SUBORDINATE COURT, TIRUR AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20-12-2002 IN O.S 213/1998 of MUNSIFF COURT, TIRUR
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2/PLAINTIFFS:
1 CHANGAMBALLI USMAN KURIKKAL
S/O.KUNHALAN KURIKKAL, RESIDING AT, KATTIPPARUTHI AMSOM DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.T.KRISHNANUNNI (SR.)
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS 3 & 4 & APPELLANT/DEFENDANTS:
1 CHERIYODATHU SAINUDHEEN
S/O.MOHAMMED HAJI, KATTIPPARUTHI AMSOM DESOM, TIRUR
TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RSA.No. 69 of 2005 2
JUDGMENT
Appellant and counsel called absent. No representation. Defects so far not cured by taking steps. Hence, this court has no other option but to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution.
Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE msp //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
P.Somarajan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
