Duraisamy v. Palanisamy
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Madras disposed of an appeal suit filed under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 1 CPC. In the absence of the respondent, the court dismissed the appeal suit and associated miscellaneous petition without costs.
What did the court decide?
The appeal suit and connected miscellaneous petition were dismissed. No costs awarded.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 26.10.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN Appeal Suit No.417 of 2017 & CMP No.14518 of 2017 Duraisamy ... Appellant Vs Palanisamy .... Respondent Prayer:- Appeal suit filed under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 1 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree, dated 25.04.2016 passed in O.S.No.33 of 2012, by the file of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gobichettipalayam. For Appellant : Mr.P.R.Balasubramanian For Respondent : No appearance JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by A.SELVAM,J.) As per the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, this Appeal Suit is dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is dismissed. /sd/Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gobichettipalayam.
2 The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras
+1 CC to Mr. P.R. Balasubramaniam , Advocate Sr.No. 76096
Appeal Suit No.417 of 2017
MD: 23/11/2017
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Duraisamy
- respondent
Palanisamy
Coram
A.SELVAM
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court