Padma Jothi v. Seerangan
Case brief
What is this about?
Counsel for the appellant sought withdrawal of the second appeal with the appellant's instructions. The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:20.06.2018
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN
S.A.No. 2057 of 2004
Padmajothi ...Appellant
Vs.
Seerangan ...Respondent
Prayer:Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against
the decree and judgment dated 07.03.2003 made in A.S.No.56 of
2001 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court at Sankari,
confirming the judgment and decree dated 31.01.1991 made in
O.S.No.69 of 1989 on the file of the District Munsif Court at
Sankari.
For Appellant : M/s.Mythili Suresh
for Sarvabhauman Associates
For Respondent : Mr.N.Manokaran
J U D G M E N T
Memo filed by the Counsel for the appellant, seeking
permission to withdraw the Second Appeal as per the instructions
of the appellant.
2.Counsel for the respondent present and takes notice.
3.In the light of the above position, the second appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition, if any, is closed. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS IX) //True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mfa
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Padmajothi
- respondent
Seerangan
Coram
T. Ravindran
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court