In this second appeal under Section 100 CPC, the court examined the status of the appeal filed by three appellants. The court dismissed the appeal for the first appellant as not pressed and abated it regarding the second and third appellants.
Second appeal dismissed as not pressed regarding the first appellant and abated regarding appellants 2 and 3.
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 : 12.01.2017
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T. RAVINDRAN
S.A.No.196 of 2011
1.Janakiraman
2.Parthasarathy
3.Raja Bhathar ... Appellants
Vs.
1.Kothandaraman
2.Velu ... Respondents
Prayer:- This Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and decree dated 24.01.2008 made in A.S.No.96 of 2004 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Chengalpet confirming the judgment and decree dated 15.06.2004 made in O.S.No.492 of 1993 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Chengalpet.
For Appellants : Mr.R.Bharath Kumar For Respondents : No appearance J U D G M E N T
The learned counsel for the appellants present. The affidavit dated 12.01.2017 filed by the first appellant has taken on record.
Sd/Asst.Registrar
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
dn
To
S.A.No.196 of 2011
gm1(co)
ss(2/2/2017)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the second appeal is maintainable or liable to be dismissed/abated.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Janakiraman
Parthasarathy
Raja Bhathar
Kothandaraman
Velu
T. Ravindran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
