Dismissed

Shanmuga Nadar v. Babi

Madras HC23 Feb 2017SA(MD)/787/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a second appeal under Section 100 of the CPC filed by Shanmuga Nadar and others against a decree confirming a lower court order. The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution as appellants failed to appear despite registered notices due to death, non-residence, or lack of instructions.

What did the court decide?

Second Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.

Shanmuga Nadar Vs Babi — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated: 23.02.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

The HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶6

S.A(MD)No.787 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011

¶7

1.Shanmuga Nadar

¶8

2.Ganesan

¶9

3.Vasanthi .. Appellants/Appellants/Defendants

¶10

Vs.

¶11

Babi .. Respondent/Respondent/Plaintiff

¶12

Prayer:- Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and Decree, dated 08.11.2010 made in A.S.No.41 of 2009 on the file of the Principal District Court, Virudhungar, confirming the Judgment and Decree, dated 22.06.2009 made in O.S.No.64 of 2007 on the file of the Sub Court, Sivakasi.

¶13

For Appellant : No appearance For Respondent: Mr.G.Gomathi Shankar

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

When the matter was listed for hearing on 14.12.2016, the learned counsel for the appellants reported 'no instructions. In these circumstances, the Registry was directed to send drafted notices to the appellants. Pursuant to the order of this Court, the Registry sent drafted notices to the appellants, which were duly received by the second appellant. Though the name of the second appellant has been printed in the cause-list, none appeared for him. Notice sent to the first appellant was returned with an endorsement that the first appellant had died and the notice sent to the third appellant was returned with an endorsement 'no residence'. Earlier, Mr.G.Gomathi Sankar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the parties had settled the matter out of Court.

¶16

2.When the matter was listed for hearing on 22.02.2017, though the name of the second appellant has been printed in the cause-list, none appeared for him. In these circumstances, the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Registry was directed to list the matter under the caption 'for dismissal' on 23.02.2017. On 23.02.2017, ie., today, though the name of the second appellant has been printed in the cause-list, none appeared for him. Hence, this Court has no other option except to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution.

¶17

¶18

3.Accordingly, this Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. However there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(AE)

¶21

/TRUE COPY/

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

¶24

1.The Principal District Judge, Virudhungar.

¶25

2.The Sub Judge, Sivakasi.

¶26

Copy to The Section Officer, V.R Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶27

¶28

sva/rr/bs/06.03.2017/2p/4c

¶29

S.A(MD)No.787 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011 23.02.2017

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Shanmuga Nadar v. Babi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanmuga Nadar v. Babi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramasamy Vs Mariammal

Jose S/O.Victor Vs Vasantha D/O.Samuel

Mariappan Vs Selvaraj

Murugan, Vs Kallugumalai Maruthuvar

Chandra, Vs Arumuga Rethina Pandian

Subramanian, Vs Muthammal