In High Court Civil Suit No.311 of 2016, Justice R Pongiappan dismissed the suit for default due to the non-appearance of the plaintiffs after the case was specifically listed for dismissal, noting that no order regarding costs is passed.
Suit dismissed for default with no order as to 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.
C.S.No.311 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN
Civil Suit No.311 of 2016
1.Uma Maheswari,
W/o.Late K.Siva Kumar,
No.10, 2 nd Street,
Bharathi Avenue Extension,
New Perungalathur,
Chennai - 600 063.
2.S.Ganesh Kumar,
S/o.Late K.Siva Kumar,
No.10, 2 nd Street,
Bharathi Avenue Extension,
New Perungalathur,
Chennai - 600 063. ... Plaintiffs
versus
1.K.Karunakaran,
S/o.Late Kanikannan,
Old No.44 New No.36,
Kodambakkam High Road,
Saidapet West,
Chennai - 600 015.
1/4
C.S.No.311 of 2016
2.K.Venkatesan,
S/o.Late Kanikannan, Old No.44 New No.36, Kodambakkam High Road, Saidapet West, Chennai - 600 015.
3.Renuga Devi,
W/o.Boopathy, No.7/A, Arjunan Street, Vartharaji Nagar, Thiruvallur - 602 001.
... Defendants
Prayer: Plaint filed under Order VII Rule 1 of C.P.C. read with Order IV Rule 1 of High Court Original Side Rules, 1956, praying for the following judgment and decree in favour of the plaintiffs for;
a) partition and allotment of 1/4th share in the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiffs jointly;
b) directing defendants 1 and 2 to render a true and proper accounts of the income out of the estate of deceased Late.Saroja Ammal and pay the plaintiffs their 1/4th share out of the net income from the estate of Saroja Ammal; and
c) directing the defendants to pay the plaintiffs the cost of the suit.
For Plaintiffs : No Appearance For Defendants : No Appearance
2/4
C.S.No.311 of 2016
J U D G M E N T
Today, when the suit is taken up for hearing, there was no
representation on behalf of the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs called absent. Even after
showing the name of the plaintiffs in the cause list and also, the matter is
listed under the caption "for dismissal", none have been appeared on behalf
of the plaintiffs. Hence, this Civil Suit is dismissed for default. However,
there is no order as to costs.
27.01.2021
Speaking order / Non-speaking order
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
sri
3/4
C.S.No.311 of 2016
R.PONGIAPPAN, J.
sri
Civil Suit No.311 of 2016
27.01.2021
4/4
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Uma Maheswari
S.Ganesh Kumar
K.Karunakaran
K.Venkatesan
Renuga Devi
R Pongiappan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
