Ponnammal v. P.Thangaraj
Case brief
What is this about?
The Madras High Court dismissed a civil revision petition and connected miscellaneous petition for non-prosecution as the petitioners failed to appear on multiple hearing dates.
What did the court decide?
dismissed for non-prosecution; connected miscellaneous petition closed; no costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.11.2019
CORAM :
The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
C.R.P.No.4362 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013
1.Ponnammal
2.P.Rathinasamy
3.R.Shankar ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.P.Thangaraj
2.P.Allimuthu
3.P.Chandran
4.P.Kumar
5.P.Gopalakrishnan
6.Poovathal
7.Pappal @ Lakshmi ... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India against the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.571 of
2013 in O.S.No.503 of 2007 dated 27.07.2013 by the I Additional
Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore.
For Petitioners : Mr.K.P.Chandrasekaran – no appearance
For Respondents : No appearance
O R D E R
When the matter was listed for hearing on 04.11.2019, there was no representation for the petitioners. Hence, the matter was adjourned to the next week. Thereafter, when the matter was listed for hearing on 11.11.2019 also, there was no representation for the petitioners. Hence, the matter was adjourned to 12.11.2019. When the matter was listed for hearing on 12.11.2019 also, there was no representation for the petitioners. Hence, the Registry was directed to list the matter under the caption “for dismissal” on 13.11.2019. Though the matter has been listed under the caption “for dismissal”, today
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Ponnammal and others
- respondent
P.Thangaraj and others
Coram
M. Duraiswamy
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court