Samundeswari v. Vasu
Case brief
What is this about?
In a second appeal under Section 100 CPC regarding property, the court recorded that the sole appellant had died with no instruction to pursue the case. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
What did the court decide?
Appeal dismissed; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.12.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
S.A.No.934 of 1996
C.M.P.No.9135 of 1996 and 1079 of 2011
Samundeswari ... Appellant/Plaintiff
Vs.
1. Vasu
2. Krishnaveni
3. The Executive Officer,
Sri Prasanna Vinayagar Koil Devastanam,
Pudupettai, Royapettai,
Madras – 14. ... Respondents/Defendants
Prayer:- This Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and decree dated 08.11.1990 in C.M.A.No.325 of 1989 on the file of the learned VIII Additional Judge City Civil Court, Madras against the Judgement and decree dated 22.09.1987 in O.S.No.7244 of 1973 on the file of the learned II Assistant Judge, City Civil Court at Madras.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Sriram
For Respondents : No appearance
JUDGMENT
It is represented by the learned counsel for the appellant that the sole appellant died and there is no instruction to pursue the case further.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the second appeal should be pursued given the death of the sole appellant.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Samundeswari
- respondent
Vasu
- respondent
Krishnaveni
- respondent
The Executive Officer, Sri Prasanna Vinayagar Koil Devastanam
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court