Dismissed

K.Lakshmiammal, v. P.Annapushpam

Madras HC12 Apr 2019CMP(MD)/5980/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a civil miscellaneous petition, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and Section 151 CPC, seeking condonation of delay to restore a second appeal. The second appeal prayed for against a judgment in a suit concerning succession and family law matters. The court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution as no representation appeared on behalf of the petitioners when the matter wa

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed for non-prosecution due to absence of representation by petitioners when listed for hearing.

K.Lakshmiammal, Vs P.Annapushpam — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

Friday, the Twelfth day of April Two Thousand and Nineteen PRESENT

¶3

The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶4

CMP(MD) No.5980 of 2018

¶5

¶6

SA(MD) No.151 of 2013

¶7

1 K.LAKSHMIAMMAL

¶8

2 K.SORIMUTHU 3 K.RAMASUBBU

4 K.MURUGAN

5 K.VASANTHI

6 K.AMUTHUA

7 R.KALA 8 R.MUTHUKANI :Petitioners/Appellants 1 to 8

¶13

Vs.

¶14

1 P.ANNAPUSHPAM

¶15

2 K.PAPA @ PAPATHI AMMAL

3 D.INDIRA

4 M.LAKSHMI

5 R.CHELLAMAL

6 A.RANI @ ANNARANI

7 G.KALPANA,

8 V.CHOKKALINGAM

9 V.VAITHIALINGAM

10 V.CHIDAMBARAM :Respondents/Appellants 9 to 17

¶24

Prayer in CMP(MD). 5980/ 2018 :

¶25

Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 5 of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ limitation Act and Section 151 CPC to condone the delay of 536 days in preferring the restoration petition to restore the Second Appeal

¶26

in SA.(MD).No.151 of 2013.

¶27

Prayer in SA(MD). 151 of 2013 :

¶28

Second Appeal is filed under section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against judgment and decree made in in A.S.No.3 of 2007 dated 04.03.2008 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tenkasi confirming the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.103 of 2002, dated 22.11.2006, on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Tenkasi.

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

This Petition is coming on for hearing on this day and upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.D.Nallathambi, Advocate for the respondent, this Court made the following order:

¶31

“When the matter was taken up for hearing on 11.04.2019, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners and hence, it was posted under the caption 'for dismissal'

¶32

Even today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non- prosecution”.

¶33

Assistant Registrar (CS III) // True Copy //

¶34

TO:

¶35

1.THE PRINCIPAL SUBORDINATE JUDGE, TENKASI. 2.THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MUNSIF, TENKASI.

¶36

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ DS/ /SAR- (30.04.2019) 2P 3C

K.Lakshmiammal, v. P.Annapushpam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Lakshmiammal, v. P.Annapushpam

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

S.Chidambaram, Vs an.Ramanathan

A.Perinbanayagam, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

A. Vellaswamy, Vs M. Arumugam

Kajamydeen, Vs Mohammed Kasim, Thro His

Abdoul Cassime Vs The Competent Authority

(*) Died Mani, S/O. Chella Vs Abdul Saleem