K.Perumal, v. M.Natesan
Case brief
What is this about?
The Second Appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution as the appellant's counsel reported lack of instructions from the appellant. The Miscellaneous Petition was also closed.
What did the court decide?
Second Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution; Miscellaneous Petition closed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.04.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
S.A.No.805 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 K.Perumal .. Appellant/Appellant/ Defendant Vs. .. Respondent/Respondent/ Plaintiff M.Natesan Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2010 in A.S.No.45 of 2007 on the file of the Sub-Court, Madurantakam, against the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2005 in O.S.No.193 of 2000 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Madurantakam. For appellant : Mr.M.S.Subramanian For respondent : Notice served - No appearance JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant reports no instructions from the appellant and also filed a Memo, dated 06.04.2017 to that effect. Hence, the Second Appeal is dismissed for nonprosecution. No costs. The Miscellaneous Petition is closed. -s/dAssistant Registrar(CSV) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar cs
Copy to
- The Subordinate Judge, Madurantakam.
- The District Munsif, Madurantakam.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
K. Perumal
- respondent
M. Natesan
Coram
S. Vaidyanathan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court