The High Court of Madras dismissed a second appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code after recording counsel's submission and a memo stating that the matter had been settled out of court between the parties.
The Second Appeal is dismissed as settled out of court. No 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTIC E R. HEMALATHA
S.A.No. 2046 of 2004
Dhandapani
Vs.
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure against the decree and judgment dated 14.01.2003 in A.S. No.19 of 2002, on the file of the Additional District Court (Fast Tract Court - II), Cuddalore, upholding the decree and judgment dated 21.06.2000 in O.S.No.817 of 1996, on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Cuddalore.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Gururaj For R2 : Mr.R.Sunil Kumar
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the matter has been settled between the parties out of Court. He has also filed a memo dated 07.09.2021 to that effect.
2.Recording the above said submission and the memo, this Second Appeal is dismissed as settled out of court. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CS-VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ham/mtl
To
+1cc to Mr.R.Sunil Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.52384
S.A.No. 2046 of 2004
RSV(CO) GN(21/10/2021)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dhandapani
K. Kannan
Smt. Chandra
K. Chandrakanthan
E. R. Hemalatha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
