S.Saroja v. N.Neelamegam
Case brief
What is this about?
Second appeal filed under Section 100 Cr.P.C. was dismissed as withdrawn after the appellant sought permission to withdraw the appeal and circulated a letter to the Registry.
What did the court decide?
Second appeal dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
What the court decided
SA.(MD)No.868 of 2005
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.11.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
SA.(MD)No.868 of 2005
Saroja
Saroja ... Appellant Vs. M.Neelamegam ... Respondent
PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 Cr.P.C., against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.14 of 2004 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Sivagangai, dated 26.04.2005, reversing the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.56 of 2001 dated 13.03.2003 on the file of the Additional District Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai.
For Appellant : Mrs.Vijayakumari Natarajan For Respondent : Mr.A.Jeyapragasam
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel appearing for the appellant seeks permission
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Saroja
- respondent
M.Neelamegam
Coram
V.Sivagnanam
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court