Dismissed
Muthusamy Pillai v. Habibullah
Madras HCSA/1292/1999
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
Second Appeal dismissed for default as counsel for appellants reported no instructions and the matter had been pending since 1999.
What did the court decide?
Second Appeal dismissed for default; no costs.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
¶2
DATED: 14.09.2021
¶3
CORAM:
¶4
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
¶5
S.A.No. 1292 of 1999
¶6
1.Muthusamy Pillai
¶7
2.Thangammal
¶8
... Appellants/Appellants/Plaintiffs
¶9
..Vs..
¶10
Habibulla ... Defendant/Respondent/Respondent
¶11
PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C.,
against the decree and judgment dated 25.01.1994 in
A.S.No.180 of 1993 on the file of Principal Sub Court, Erode,
confirming the decree and judgment dated 26.07.1993 in
O.S.No.88 of 1991 on the file of I Additional District Munsif
Court, Erode.
¶12
For Appellants: Mrs.S.T.P.Kuilmozhi
For Respondent : Notice not served
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- appellant
Muthusamy Pillai
- appellant
Thangammal
- respondent
Habibulla
Coram
AI extract
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court