Ramasamy Boyan v. Sarasu
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Madras dismissed the second appeal as abated because the sole appellant had died and his legal representatives could not be traced within the allotted time. The miscellaneous petition was closed.
What did the court decide?
The Second Appeal dismissed as abated; Miscellaneous Petition closed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.04.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
S.A.No.786 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011
Ramasamy Boyan .. Appellant/Respondent/Plaintiff Vs. Sarasu .. Respondent/Appellant/Respondent
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 07.03.2011 in A.S.No.40 of 2010 on the file of the Sub-Court, Bhavani, Erode District, against the judgment and decree dated 30.10.2009 in O.S.No.770 of 2004 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif Court, Bhavani, Erode District.
For appellant : Mr.D.Shivakumaran For respondent : Mr.V.Rajesh
JUDGMENT
It is represented by the learned counsel for the appellant by filing Memo, dated 07.02.2017 that the sole appellant died and he requested time to take steps to bring the legal representatives of the deceased sole appellant, on record. When the appeal was taken up for hearing on 08.03.2017, learned counsel for the appellant requested further time to take steps to bring the legal representatives of the deceased sole appellant, on record. Accordingly, when the appeal is taken up for hearing today (07.04.2017), learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he is unable to get the details of the legal representatives of the deceased sole appellant. Hence, the Second Appeal is dismissed as abated. No costs. The Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/-
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Ramasamy Boyan
- respondent
Sarasu
Coram
S. Vaidyanathan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court