The second appeal filed by Josephine Manuel against a decree and judgment was dismissed for non-prosecution as the appellant's counsel remained absent on the day of final hearing.
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
WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940
SA.No. 164 of 2002 (C)
AGAINST THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT IN AS 140/1996 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM DATED 26/09/2001
AGAINST THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT IN OS 478/1993 of PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT,ERNAKULAM DATED 25/03/1996
APPELLANT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:
JOSEPHINE MANUEL, W/O LATE MANUAL AGED 62 YEARS, PADINJATTUMURI HOUSE, VADUTHALA DESOM, CHERANALLOOR VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.SIMON LUIZ SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:
CHINNAMMA, W/O LATE GEORGE KALATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VADUTHALA DESOM, CHERANALOOR VILLAGE, KANAYANOOR TALUK,, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.D.KRISHNA PRASAD SRI.K.A.SHAJI MATHEW SRI.PRINCE VARGHESE. K.
THIS SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
S.A.No.164/2002
2
JUDGMENT
There is no representation for the appellant. Last time also, the appellant's
counsel remained absent and there was no representation though the case was included in the list for final hearing and posted on that day. Today also, the appellant's counsel remained absent. Nobody represented the matter. Hence the
appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/-
P.SOMARAJAN
JUDGE
sv
JOSEPHINE MANUEL, W/O LATE MANUAL
CHINNAMMA, W/O LATE GEORGE KALATHIPARAMBIL
P.SOMARAJAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
