Second Appeal dismissed for default as the appellant appeared in open court without representation following a memo reporting lack of instructions. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED :18.04.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
S.A(MD)NO.76 OF 2014 and M.P(MD)No.2 of 2014
Jebaraj :Appellant/Appellant/Second Defendant
.vs.
1.Francisca Pandian :Ist Respondent/Ist Respondent/Plaintiff 2.Joseph :IInd Respondent/IInd Respondent/First Defendant
PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree made in A.S.No.14 of 2007, dated 20.10.2010, on the file of Sub-Judge, Thoothukudi, confirming the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.136 of 2001, dated 11.09.2006, on the file of District Munsif Court, Srivaikundam.
For Appellant :Mr.M.P.Senthil
For Respondent-1 :Mr.J.Ashok
For Respondent-2 :Notice dispensed with
**JUDGMENT ***************
The learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo, dated 16.4.2024 reporting ‘’no instructions’’.The said memo is recorded.
2
The appellant is called in Open Court. There is no representation for the appellant. Hence, the Second Appeal is dismissed for default. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
18.04.2024
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
NCC:Yes/No
vsn
To
3
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
vsn
JUDGMENT MADE IN S.A(MD)NO.76 OF 2014 and M.P(MD)No.2 of 2014
18.04.2024
Jebaraj
Francisca Pandian
Joseph
S.Sounthar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
