Natarajan v. Vaithianathan
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed the second appeal as withdrawn. The appellant's counsel indicated that the sole respondent had sold the property to the appellant, rendering the appeal unnecessary.
What did the court decide?
Second Appeal dismissed as withdrawn. Connected Miscellaneous Petition closed. No costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 06.07.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
S.A.No.1293 of 2008 & M.P.No.1 of 2008
Natarajan ... Appellant/Defendant
Vs. Vaithianathan ...Respondent/Plaintiff
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and Decree in A.S.No.4 of 2006 dated 12.02.2008 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Chidambaram, confirming the Judgement and Decree as made in O.S.No.108 of 2002 dated 29.04.2005 on the file of the Additional District Munsif at Chidambaram.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Karthikeyan For Respondents : Not ready in notice
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel for the appellant seeks to withdraw the Second Appeal since the sole respondent herein has sold his property to the appellant. The Second Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. No costs.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Natarajan
- respondent
Vaithianathan
Coram
P.T. ASHA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court