Vs
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Judicature at Madras dismissed a second appeal for default due to the non-appearance of the appellant and lack of representation at the hearing.
What did the court decide?
The second appeal is dismissed for default. No costs.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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: 04.01.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN
Kaladevi
...Appellant/Appellant/Plantiff
Vs.
Pappe Gounder @ Thambu ...Respondent/Respondent/Defendant
Prayer:- This Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgement and decree dated 08.09.1995 in A.S.No.94 of 1994 on the file of the Subordinate Judge at Udumalpet and the judgment & decree dated 27.07.1994 in O.S.No.484 of 1995 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Pollachi.
When the second appeal came up for hearing on 03.01.2017, none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Hence, the Registry was directed to list the matter to be posted today, under the caption “For dismissal”.
- Even today, though the matter is listed under the caption “For dismissal”, when the matter was called, no one has represented the appellant.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Kaladevi
- respondent
Pappe Gounder @ Thambu
Coram
G. Jayachandran
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court