V.K.Rajan v. Krishna Parameswar
Case brief
What is this about?
This regular second appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution as the appellant and counsel were absent on the day of hearing. The matter, dating back to 2003, could not be argued.
What did the court decide?
The appeal is dismissed for non prosecution due to the absence of the appellant and counsel.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
THURSDAY ,THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1940
RSA.No. 802 of 2003
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15-03-2003 IN AS 205/2001 of II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT,ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23-03-2001 IN OS 105/1998 of II ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:
V.K.RAJAN PROPRIETOR, HI-TECH RUBBERS, KIZHAKKAMBALAM, PIN-683 562.
BY ADV. SRI.M.A.ASIF
RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:
KRISHNA PARAMESWAR, SOLE PROPRIETOR, LOTUS CHEMICALS, THYKOODAM CHURCH ROAD, COCHIN-682 019.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
V.K.RAJAN PROPRIETOR, HI-TECH RUBBERS
- respondent
KRISHNA PARAMESWAR, SOLE PROPRIETOR, LOTUS CHEMICALS
Coram
P.SOMARAJAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court