Kasiyammal v. Sepperumal
Case brief
What is this about?
Two second appeals filed under Section 100 CPC were dismissed for non-prosecution as the appellants failed to appear for hearing on the listed date.
What did the court decide?
Second appeals dismissed for non-prosecution. Connection miscellaneous petitions closed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.01.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN
S.A.Nos.681 and 682 of 1999
C.M.P.Nos.7450 and 7451 of 1999
S.A.No.681 of 1999
1. Kasiyammal
2. Arumugam ...Appellants
Vs.
1. Sepperumal
2. Thangaraj
3. Kandasamy
4. Ramadoss
S.A.No.682 of 1999
Kasiyammal ...Appellant
Vs.
Ramadoss ...Respondent
Prayer:- These Second Appeals are filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the common judgment and decree of learned Sub Judge, Ariyalur dated 29.01.1998 made in A.S.Nos. 132 & 133 of 1993 setting aside the decree and judgment made in O.S.Nos. 276 & 287 of 1992 dated 22.03.1993 on the file of District Munsif, Ariyalur.
For Appellant : No Appearance For Respondents: Mr.M.V.Krishnan for R4 R1 & R3 – No appearance
COMMON JUDGMENT
When both the second appeals came up for hearing on 06.01.2017, none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Hence, the Registry was directed to list the matters to be posted today, under the caption “For dismissal”.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Kasiyammal
- appellant
Arumugam
- respondent
Sepperumal
- respondent
Thangaraj
- respondent
Kandasamy
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court