The High Court of Madras heard an appeal for non-prosecution where the appellant failed to file a vakalat despite multiple notices and adjournments, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.
The Appeal Suit is dismissed for non-prosecution. 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.
Appeal Suit No.608 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.12.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
Appeal Suit No.608 of 2013
Dhyanapeeta Charitable Trust, Represented by its Trustee, A.LOKANAYAKI, W/o.Late. A.Arunachalam #56/77, Anaikattu Street, Thiruvannamalai
... Appellant
Versus
1.Nakkheeran Publications, Rep.by its Editor, 105, Jani Jahan Khan Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600014.
2.Thiru.Nakkheeran Gopal, Editor, Nakkheeran Publications ... Respondents
Appeal Suit is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 26.04.2013 passed in O.S.No.1115 of 2010, on the file of the XIX Additional City Civil Court, Madras.
For Appellant : No Appearance For Respondents : Mr. P.T.Perumal
JUDGMENT
1/4
Appeal Suit No.608 of 2013
This matter originally came up before this Court for hearing on 08.06.2022 and it was recorded by this Court that only the learned Counsel for the respondents alone is present and directed the registry to verify as to whether any vakalat is filed on behalf of the appellant as the erstwhile Counsel had filed a Memo reporting that they have given a change of vakalat.
2.Thereafter, again the matter came up for hearing on 19.07.2022, and since no vakalat was filed on behalf of the appellants, the learned Counsel for the respondents was directed to take private notice to the appellants and the matter was posted on 29.07.2022. Thereafter, the matter was again adjourned to 24.08.2022, on which date, even when the respondent Counsel had taken notice, and the notice has also been received by the appellants, and no vakalat was filed thereafter. Therefore, the Registry was directed to print the name of the appellants in the cause list.
3.Again the matter was listed on 02.11.2022, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants and at request of the learned Counsel for the respondents, the matter was adjourned on 15.11.2022.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Thereafter, again when the matter was taken up for consideration on 2/4
Appeal Suit No.608 of 2013 30.11.2022, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants and the matter was posted today i.e., on 02.12.2022.
4.Even today, when the matter came up for hearing, no representation
was made on behalf of the appellants. Therefore, the Appeal Suit is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
02.12.2022
Index : yes/no Speaking/Non-speaking order
klt To
1.The XIX Additional City Civil Court, Madras.
2.The Section Officer, Original side, High Court of Madras.
3/4
Appeal Suit No.608 of 2013
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
klt
A.S. No.608 of 2013
02.12.2022
4/4
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dhyanapeeta Charitable Trust
Nakkheeran Publications
Thiru.Nakkheeran Gopal
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
