T.Chinnaraj v. Saroja
Case brief
What is this about?
In this second appeal regarding O.S. No. 202 of 1992 and A.S. No. 7 of 1998, the court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution as the appellant failed to appear or serve notice despite it being filed in 2002.
What did the court decide?
Second appeal dismissed for non-prosecution with no costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 01.04.2022
CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA S.A.No. 97 of 2002
T. Chinnaraj ...Appellant/1st Defendant
Vs.
- Saroja
- Vasantha 3. Manickam 4. Chennammal
- Minnala
- R. Jaya ...Respondents/Plaintiff 1 to 4 and Defendants 2 & 3
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC against the decree and judgment passed in A.S. No.7 of 1998 dated 28.09.2000 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Krishnagiri, upholding the decree and judgment passed in O.S. No.202 of 1992 dated 28.10.1997 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri.
For Appellant : No appearance For R1 to R3 : Mr. V. Nicholas R4 : Not Ready in Notice R5 : No appearance R6 : Given up (order dated 22/07/2021) JUDGMENT
Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. A perusal of the records shows that the appellant has not served notice to the fourth respondent till date. The second appeal is of the year 2002 and hence, I do not find any reason to keep the appeal pending.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
T. Chinnaraj
- respondent
Saroja
- respondent
Vasantha
- respondent
Manickam
- respondent
Chennammal
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court