Second Appeal dismissed for default as the legal heirs of the appellant were not impleaded despite repeated adjournments. No order as to costs.
Second Appeal dismissed for default.
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: 17.03.2015
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE K.B.K.VASUKI
S.A.No.1087 OF 2001
V.Ganapathy .. Appellant/ Defendant
Vs.
N.Gajanan .. Respondent/ Plaintiff
PRYER : This second appeal filed under Section 100 C.P.C. against
the judgment and decree dated 19.02.2001 passed in A.S.No.25 of
2000 on the file of the Sub Court, Madurantakam, confirming
the judgment and decree dated 14.01.2000 passed in O.S.No.450 of
1998 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Madurantakam.
For Appellant : Mr.M.S.Subramanian
For Respondent : No appearance
J U D G M E N T
Learned counsel for the appellant is present. In spite of
repeated adjournments, no steps have been taken to implead the
legalheirs of the sole appellant. Hence, the Second Appeal is
dismissed for default. No order as to costs
Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CS III)
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
kal
To
1. The Subordinate Judge
Madurantakam
2. The District Munsif Madurantakam
1 cc to Mr.D. Srinivasa Ragavan, Advocate, Sr. 15416 1 cc to Mr.M. Subramanian, Advocate, Sr. 15764
S.A.No.1087 OF 2001
UG (CO) kk 15/4
1 provisions across 1 enactments
V. Ganapathy
N. Gajanan
K.B.K. Vasuki
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
