Dismissed
Kandasamy, v. Dhanasekaran
Madras HCAS/837/2010
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
The single-judge bench dismissed a first appeal filed under Section 96 of the CPC as settled between the parties. No costs were awarded.
What did the court decide?
The first appeal is dismissed as settled out of court. No costs awarded.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
¶2
DATED : 15.07.2019
¶3
CORAM
¶4
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN
¶5
A.S.No.837 of 2010
¶6
and
¶7
M.P.No.1 of 2010
¶8
- Kandasamy
2. Saraswathi
3. Savithri ...Appellants/Respondents/Plaintiffs1, 3 & 4
Vs.
Dhanasekaran ...Respondent/Petitioner/Defendant
Prayer:
First Appeal filed under Section 96 of the CPC, against the
judgment and decree passed in I.A.No.661 of 2006 in O.S.No.303
of 2004 dated 21.04.2009 on the file of the Additional District
Judge (Fast Track Court No.1), Salem.
¶9
For Appellants : Mr. S. Kaithamalai Kumaran For Respondent : Ms. Zeeneth Begum for Mr.V.Rajesh
¶10
JUDGMENT Both counsel present.
¶11
- It is represented by the appellants' counsel that the matter has been settled between the parties and accordingly, prays for the withdrawal of the first appeal and has also made an endorsement to that effect.
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- appellant
Kandasamy
- respondent
Dhanasekaran
Coram
AI extract
T. Ravindran
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court