L.Viagulam Ammal v. Arulswamy
Case brief
What is this about?
Second appeal filed under Section 100 Cr.P.C. Appellant sought permission to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
What did the court decide?
Second appeal dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
What the court decided
SA.No.1652 of 2003
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 19.11.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
SA.No.1652 of 2003
L.Viagulam Ammal ... Appellant Vs. 1. Arulswamy 2. L.K.S.Marian ... Respondents
PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 Cr.P.C., to set aside the judgment and decree of the learned Principal District Judge, Sivagangai, dated 10.03.2003 in A.S.No.35 of 2001 reversing the judgment and decree dated 01.12.2000 in O.S.No.10 of 2000 of the learned District Munsif, Ilayankudi.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Pon Ramkumar For Respondents : Mr.S.Parthasarathy for R1 : R2 dismissed as abated
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel appearing for the appellant seeks permission
Parties & counsel
- appellant
L.Viagulam Ammal
- respondent
Arulswamy
Coram
V.Sivagnanam
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court