Vs Chandra
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Madras dismissed the second appeal for non-prosecution as the appellant failed to appear while the respondents also did not appear. No substantive hearing took place.
What did the court decide?
Second appeal dismissed for non-prosecution. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.01.2018
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN
S.A. No.838 of 2003
Rajagopal Naicker ... Appellant/Defandant Vs. 1.Chandra 2.Kanniammal ... Respondents/Plaintiffs Prayer:
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.10 of 2001, dated 24.02.2003, on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Chengalpattu in confirming the judgment and decree in O.S.No.326 of 1991, dated 31.01.2001 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Chengalpattu.
For Appellant : No appearance For Respondents : No appearance
J U D G M E N T
This matter was listed on 02.01.2018 and on that date, there was no representation on both sides and the appellant being called and remaining absent, Registry was directed to list the matter today (i.e) on 03.01.2018, under the caption “for dismissal”.
2.Today also when the matter is called, there is no representation on both sides. Appellant called absent.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Rajagopal Naicker
- respondent
Chandra
- respondent
Kanniammal
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court