The High Court of Judicature at Madras dismissed a second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code due to the appellant's non-appearance despite multiple calls, levying costs on the appellant.
Second Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution with costs.
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 : 04.03.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN
S.A.No.1473 of 2005
S.Indirani ...Appellant/Defendant
Vs.
R.Radhakrishnan ...Respondent/Plaintiff
Prayer:
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure
Code, to set aside the judgment and decree of the Additional
District Judge of Fast Track Court V, Madras, dated 13.12.2004
made in A.S.No.144 of 2004 against the judgment and decree of
the lower court V Asst. City Civil Court at Chennai dated
30.04.2003 in O.S.No.3313 of 1998.
For Appellant : No apperance.
For Respondents : Mr.M.L.Ramesh
JUDGMENT
This matter was listed on 01.03.2019 and on that day, there was no representation for the appellant despite the matter being called twice. The appellant being called and remaining absent, Registry was directed to list the matter under the caption "for dismissal" on 04.03.2019.
MEMORANDUM OF COSTS
Respondents/Plaintiff( ) Costs
Rs. P.
Stamp for Vakalatnama 10.00
Advocate's fee [FC not received] --
Translation and Printing/Typing charges nil
--------
10.00
---------
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
bga
1. Additional District Judge,
Fast Track Court V, Madras.
2. The V Assistant City Civil Judge,
Chennai.
Copy to
The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
High Court, Madras.
S.A.No.1473 of 2005
ln[co]
srg 20/06/2019
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S. Indirani
R. Radhakrishnan
T. Ravindran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
