Ramiah v. Chowdamma
Case brief
What is this about?
The second appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution as the appellant failed to appear on multiple occasions, including the hearing date. The connected miscellaneous petition was also closed with no costs awarded.
What did the court decide?
Second Appeal and connected miscellaneous petition dismissed for non-prosecution; no costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28.07.2017 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.BASKARAN
Second Appeal No.763 of 2006
and
M.P.No.1 of 2006
Ramiah .. Appellant/Defendant
Vs.
Munivenkatamma (died)
Chowdamma .. Respondent/Plaintiff
* * *
Prayer : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C.,
against the Judgment and Decree dated 29.07.2005 passed in
A.S.No.6 of 2005 on the file of learned Subordinate Judge,
Hosur, modifying the decree and judgment dated 18.12.2003 passed
in O.S.No.160 of 1998 on the file of learned District Munsif,
Hosur.
For Appellant : No appearance
For Respondent : M/s.R.Gowri
J U D G M E N T
Today, when the matter is called, there is no representation
for the appellant till the end of list. Even on the last
occasion, on 18.07.2017, when the matter was posted and called,
there was no representation for the appellant and posted
under the caption "for dismissal". It seems that the
appellant is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Hence,
the second appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CCC)
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
uma
To
1.The Subordinate Judge, Hosur.
2.The District Munsif, Hosur.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Ramiah
- respondent
Chowdamma
Coram
S. Baskaran
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court