K.Balakattayya v. Kirubammal
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Madras dismissed the second appeal filed under Section 100 CPC for non-prosecution as no instructions were received from the appellants who could not be contacted.
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 :01.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTIC E R. HEMALATHA
| S.A.No. 1507 of 1996 |
|---|
| 1. K. Balakottayya ..1stAppellant/1stRespondent/2ndPlaintiff |
| 2. J. Hemasundari ..2ndAppellant/3rdRespondent/4thPlaintiff |
| Vs. |
| 1. Kirubammal ..1stRespondent/1stAppellant/1stDefendant |
| 2. P.Chinnayya ..2ndRespondent/2ndAppellant/2ndDefendant |
| 3. J. Kondammal ..3rdRespondent/2ndRespondent/3rdPlaintiff |
| 4. Venkatalakshmi ..4thRespondent/4thRespondent/3rdDefendant |
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC against the decree and judgment dated 29.09.1995 passed in A.S. No.13 of 1995 on the file of the VII Additional City Civil Judge, Madras, reversing the decree and judgment dated 01.03.1994 passed in O.S. No.566 of 1988 on the file of the VII Assistant City Civil Judge, Madras.
JUDGMENT
A perusal of the records shows that notice to the respondents 3 and 4 have not yet been served though the appeal is of the year 1996. It is also represented by the learned counsel for the appellants that he is unable to contact his clients and therefore, reporting no instructions for the appellants.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
K. Balakottayya
- appellant
J. Hemasundari
- respondent
Kirubammal
- respondent
P. Chinnayya
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court