Dismissed

Anjali v. Ilayaperumal

Madras HC11 Jun 2019SA/33/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC as abated. The Court held that despite an order directing the appellants to list the legal heirs of the deceased sole respondent, the appellants failed to appear or take steps to implead them, rendering further proceedings pointless.

What did the court decide?

Second Appeal dismissed as abated. Connected miscellaneous petitions also dismissed. No costs.

Anjali Vs Ilayaperumal — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 11.06.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN

¶5

S.A. No.33 of 2016

¶6

and

¶7

CMP Nos.20164 and 1059 of 2016

¶8

Anjali
2. Rajendran
3. Venkatesan ...Appellants/Plaintiffs
Vs.
Illayaperumal ...Respondent/Defendant
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil
Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 11.07.2014
passed by the appellate court in A.S.No.333/2013 on the file of
VII Addl. City Civil Court, Chennai, reversing the judgment and
decree dated 13.06.2012 of the trial court in O.S.No.2687/2004
on the file of XVI Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.
For Appellants : No appearance
For respondent : Mr.N.Rajan
JUDGMENT
This matter was listed on 10.06.2019 and on that day,
there was no representation for the appellants, despite the
matter being called twice and on the appellants being
called and remaining absent, the Registry was directed to list
the matter on 11.06.2019 under the caption "for dismissal".

¶9

Today, when the matter is called, there is no representation for the appellants. Appellants called absent. Counsel for the respondent present.

¶10

3.As could be seen from the material available on record, the sole respondent had died long back and despite being informed by way of the memo, the appellants have not taken steps to bring the legal heirs of the deceased respondent as per law and proceed with the matter. In such view of the matter, there is no purpose in keeping the appeal further pending.

¶11

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

In the light of the above position, the Second Appeal is dismissed as abated. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed.

¶13

-s/dAssistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶14

True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
bga
Copy to
1. VII Addl. City Civil Court, Chennai.
2. XVI Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.
3.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras
+1 CC to Mr.N.Rajan, Advocate sr 46808.
S.A. No.33 of 2016
and
CMP Nos.20164 and 1059 of 2016
LN(CO)
SP(15/07/2019)

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Anjali v. Ilayaperumal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anjali v. Ilayaperumal

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

A.Shanmugam Vs K.Palanisamy

Gunavathi Vs Tiruppur District Collector

N. Sivakami Vs Nallathal(Died)

Tamil Naldu Mercantile Bank Vs M/S.B.T. Rajan & Co.

D.Vijaya Vs v.Lakshmi

A.Krishnamoorthy Vs Shingaraj