Manickam v. Sadasivam
Case brief
What is this about?
Two second appeals were dismissed by ignoring the learned counsel for the appellant as their client failed to appear and provide instructions.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.02.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
S.A.Nos.1180 & 698 of 1998
S.A.No.1180/1998 Manickam ...Appellant
Vs. 1.Sadasivam 2.Murugan 3.Ponnusami 4.Gnanasankara Gounder 5.Padmavathi 6.Selvaperumal 7.Ramu Gounder 8.Masilamani 9.Ganapathi ...Respondents Prayer:The Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the Judgment and decree dated 30.09.1997 in A.S.No.282 of 1995 before the Addl. District Court, Villupuram preferred against the Judgment and the decree dt. 07.08.1995 in O.S.No.371/93 before the Additional District Munsif's Court, Villupuram. For Appellant : M/s.R.Meenal For Respondents : M/s.V.Raghavachari for R2 R1, 3, 7, 8 & 9 dead (memo filed dt.08.10.2014) (steps due) R4 to R6 – Given up S.A.No.698/1998 Gnanasankara Gounder ...Appellant Vs. 1.Sadasivam 2.Murugan 3.Ponnusami
- 4.Manickam
- 5.Padmavathi
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Manickam
- respondent
Sadasivam
- appellant
Gnanasankara Gounder
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court