Noorjahab v. Ragamah Nisha
Case brief
What is this about?
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of CPC dismissed for default as appellants failed to appear despite notice. Connected miscellaneous petition closed without costs.
What did the court decide?
Second Appeal dismissed for default; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed. No costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.12.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
S.A.No.366 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2012
1.Noorjahan 2.Saribagani 3.Iysantchiyal 4.Fareetha Begum 5.Tajnisha ...Appellants/ Defendants 1 to 5 Vs. 1.Ragamath Nisha 2.Mohamed Hussain 3.Halimanatchiyal 4.Mohamed Ali 5.Abdul Rahman 6.Mohamed Abdul Kadar 7.Katheeja Natchiyal 8.Mohamed Tazoudine ...Respondents 1 to 9/ 9.Zeenathul Munawara Plaintiffs 1 to 9 (R8, R9 are rep power agent Mohamed Ali - 4th Respondent) 10.Mohamed Hussan Kuthoos ...Respondents 10 & 11/ 11.Mohamed Goudh Defendants 6 & 7 (R10 and 11 remained absent before the lower courts and set exparte and hence notice is not necessary)
PRAYER: This Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 of CPC against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.16 of 2008, by the learned Additional District Judge, Puducherry, dated 21.04.2009, confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.358 of 2005, by the Principal District Munsif, Karaikal, dated 28.03.2008.
For Appellant : No appearance For R1 to R9 : Ms.S.Janani For M/s.Sai For R10 & R11 : Set exparte
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Noorjahan
- appellant
Saribagani
- appellant
Iysantchiyal
- appellant
Fareetha Begum
- appellant
Tajnisha
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court