Mani Ammal v. Kuppusamy
Case brief
What is this about?
Second appeal dismissed for non-prosecution as the appellant appeared with no instructions and failed to bring legal representatives on record, indicating lack of interest in prosecuting the appeal.
What did the court decide?
Second appeal dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.07.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
S.A. No.1743 of 2003
Mani Ammal .... Appellant/Defendant
Versus
Kuppusamy .... Respondent/Plaintiff
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure code, against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Cuddalore, dated 29.01.1999 passed in A.S. No.48 of 1999 dismissing the appeal, confirming the decree and judgment of the District Munsif, Cuddalore in O.S. No.640 of 1996, dated 04.03.1998.
For Appellant : No appearance
For Respondent : Ms.R.Meenal
JUDGMENT
Parties & counsel
- appellant
MANI AMMAL
- respondent
KUPPUSAMY
Coram
ABDUL QUDDHOSE
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court