Second appeal against a judgment concerning property between the parties. Counsel reported no instructions from the party, and the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution without adjudication on merits.
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 SATHISH NINAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1945
RSA NO. 1178 OF 2006
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.08.2006 IN AS NO.241 OF 2003 OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT,ERNAKULAM ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 05.04.2003 IN OS NO.1232 OF 2000 OF I
ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM
APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFF:
RSA NO.1178/06
-: 2 :-
DINESH R.SHENOY
K.M.SUBHISHA
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON 20.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Sathish Ninan, J.
=================================
R.S.A. No.1178 of 2006
=================================
Dated this the 20th day of March, 2024
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel for the appellants submit
that there is no instructions from the party.
Hence this appeal is dismissed for non-
prosecution.
Sd/- Sathish Ninan, Judge
SVP
Subadra
Sarala
Lalitha
Lenin V.M.
Usha
Shaji Valath
Sathish Ninan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
