The High Court at Madras dismissed a Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code for default as the appellant failed to appear when the matter was listed for hearing and captioned for dismissal.
Dismissal of the Second Appeal for default. No costs.
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: 23.01.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN
S.A.No.341 of 1999
and CMP No.4408 of 1999
Radhammal ...Appellant
Vs.
1. Murugesan
2. Govindasamy ...Respondents
Prayer:- This Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil
Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 24.09.1998
passed by the Sub Judge, Vellore in A.S.No.118 of 1994
confirming the judgment and decree dated 06.09.1994 passed by
the Additional District Munsiff, Vellore in O.S.No.540 of 1991.
For Appellant : No Appearance
For 1 st Respondent : Mr.R.Siddharth
for T.R.Rajaraman
For 2 nd Respondent : Not Ready Notice
ORDER
When the Second Appeal came up for hearing on 19.01.2017, 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”.
Sd/-
Asst.Registrar
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
jv
To
1 The Sub Judge, Vellore
2 The Additional District Munsiff, Vellore.
+1cc to M/s.T.R.Rajaraman, Advocate sr.4444
S.A.No.341 of 1999
rp(co)
ss(7/2/2017)
Radhammal
Murugesan
Govindasamy
G. Jayachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
