Leela Bai v. Duraimani
Case brief
What is this about?
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC dismissed for default as the appellant's counsel failed to appear and had no instructions; connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition closed.
What did the court decide?
The Second Appeal was dismissed for default; no costs awarded; connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition closed.
What the court decided
S.A(MD)No.361 of 2005
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.12.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
S .A(MD)No.361 of 2005 and C.M.P(MD)No.3165 of 2005
1.Leela Bai 2.Papeela 3.Rakeela 4.Amalin ... Appellants/Respondents/Defendants
Vs.
Durai Mani ... Respondent/Appellant/Plaintiff
PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree of the learned Principal District Judge, Nagarcoil in A.S.No.162 of 2003, dated 05.01.2004 reversing the judgment and decree passed by the Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram in O.S.No.40 of 1999 dated 24.06.2002.
JUDGMENT
This second appeal has been adjourned on several occasions from 26.11.2021. Finally the learned counsel for the appellant reported no instructions on 21.12.2021. The name of the appellants are printed and listed today under the caption “for dismissal”. There is no representation on the side of the appellants. Therefore, the Second Appeal is dismissed for default. No costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Leela Bai
- appellant
Papeela
- appellant
Rakeela
- appellant
Amalin
- respondent
Durai Mani
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court