Vs
Case brief
What is this about?
The Second Appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution as the appellant failed to appear despite being listed for hearing.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05.11.2019 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN S.A.No.126 of 1996
C.V.Ragavan ..Appellant/ Appellant / Plaintiff Vs.
1.Srinivasulu Naidu (Deceased) 2.Chandramouli 3.Ananthasayanam 4.Kusuma Kumari 5.Vittala Bai 6.Kumari [Respondents 2 to 6 are brought on record as legal representatives of the deceased sole respondent vide order of court dated 16.04.2010 made in CMP.No.1133 and 1134 of 2009.]
..Respondents/ Respondents/Defendants
PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree of the learned Judge of Subordinate Court at Ranipet dated 13.01.1995 passed in A.S.No.82 of 1991 dismissing the appeal, confirming the decree and judgment of the District Munsiff of Sholinghur in O.S.No.350 of 1986 dated 19.04.1991.
For Appellant : No appearance
J U D G M E N T
The appeal is pending for almost 23 years. The respondents 2 to 6 have not been served yet. There is no representation for the appellant when the matter was listed on 04.11.2019. Hence, the matter was posted under the caption for dismissal today. Even today, none appears for the appellant.
- Hence, the appeal in S.A.No.126 of 1996 is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
C.V. Ragavan
- respondent
1. Srinivasulu Naidu (Deceased) & Ors.
Coram
R. Subramanian
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court