This court held that the legal proceeding stands abated due to the death of a respondent, noting that applications to set aside abatement were not numbered or placed on record.
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 JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.12.2015
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE and
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
L.P.A.No.33 of 2003
1.Anthony Packiam 2.Irudhayam Jeyaraj 3.Elizabeth Mary 4.Philomina 5.Amalraj .. Appellants/Appellants/ Defendants
vs
1.Anthony Salathmarian 2.Sakkannan 3.Vaiyapuri 4.Natarajan 5.Mariya Thangam 6.S.G.Panneerselvam 7.S.M.Lawrence 8.Kulanchi Theresa .. Respondents/Respondents/ Plaintiff
Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the decree and judgment dated 23.07.2001 in A.S.No.111 of 1989 on the file of this Court. For Appellants .. Mr.S.James
For Respondents .. Ms.R.Anitha for RR1, 6 to 8
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)
On the last date of hearing, we were informed that applications have been filed for setting aside the abatement and impleadment of the legal heirs of the deceased second
respondent, who passed away in 2009, but they are not numbered and we called upon the learned counsel for the appellants to ensure that the applications are numbered and placed before this Court.
-s/d-
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
bbr
To
The Court of the Subordinate Judge, Madurai
L.P.A.No.33 of 2003
aa17/12/2015
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present proceeding stands abated due to the death of a respondent and pending applications for impleadment.
Anthony Packiam and others
Anthony Salathmarian and others
Sanjay Kishan Kaul
Pushpa Sathyanarayana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
