R.Sakthi v. P.Velayudam and 3 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
Second Appeal dismissed in absentia for non-prosecution due to lack of appellant representation despite repeated adjournments.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 12.07.2017
The Honourable Dr.Justice G.JAYACHANDRAN
Second Appeal No.622 of 1999
in
C.M.P. 6984 of 1999.
R.Sakthi .. Appellant/Plaintiff
/versus/
1.P.Velayudham
2.Kumaravelu
3.Mayavan
4.Velu .. Respondents/Defendants 1 to 4
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of
Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated
11.03.1999 passed in A.S.No.94 of 1998 on the file of the
learned Principal District Judge, Cuddalore reversing the
judgment and decree dated 28.04.1998 passed in O.S.No.755 of
1993 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Cuddalore.
For Appellant :No appearance
For Respondents :Mr.R.Meenal for R1 to R4
JUDGMENT
This matter is being listed for final disposal. Since 20.01.2017 under one pretext or another, the learned counsel for the appellant has taken six adjournments. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation for the appellant. Hence, the second appeal is dismissed for nonprosecution. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
-s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
Parties & counsel
- appellant
R.Sakthi
- respondent
1.P.Velayudham
- respondent
2.Kumaravelu
- respondent
3.Mayavan
- respondent
4.Velu
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court