Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

K.Santhi Vs Vigraharoopa Arulmighu — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2024)

Home
Madras HC
2024
K.Santhi Vs Vigraharoopa ArulmighuK.Santhi v. Vigraharoopa Arulmighu

Dismissed

K.Santhi v. Vigraharoopa Arulmighu

Madras HC4 Dec 2024SA(MD)/935/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeal dismissed for default as appellant's counsel reported no instructions and the appellant failed to appear.

What did the court decide?

Second Appeal dismissed for default; no costs awarded.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

S.A(MD)No.935 of 2005

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 04.12.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

S.A(MD)No.935 of 2005

K.Santhi

... Plaintiff / Appellant / Appellant

-Vs-

1.Vigraharoopa Arulmighu Balasubramaniaswamy

2.Vigraharoopa Arulmighu Kasi Viswanathaswamy

Vigraharoopa Arulmighu Visalakshi Amman Temple

All idols are represented by their Hereditary Trustee T.Chockalinga Chettiar, S/o.Thinnappa Chettiar, Vennaimalai Temple, No.53, Gurunatha Street, Karur Town. ... Defendants / Respondents / Respondents

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Civil Procedure Code100

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
K.Santhi
respondent
Vigraharoopa Arulmighu Balasubramaniaswamy
respondent
Vigraharoopa Arulmighu Kasi Viswanathaswamy
respondent
Vigraharoopa Arulmighu Visalakshi Amman Temple (represented by T.Chockalinga Chettiar)

Coram

AI extract

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 4 Dec 2024 · December
Registered: 29 Sept 2005
Case no.: SA(MD)/935/2005

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from V.sivagnanam

Maria Arputham Vs Dr.a.Jesydasan
3 Dec 2024
Rajeswari & Co. Vs the Commercial Tax Officer
2 Dec 2024
Sreeveedhas Vs Anbayyan
2 Dec 2024
1. Sivakami (Died), 2. Murugan Vs S. Govindammal
4 Dec 2024

Cite this judgement

K.Santhi v. Vigraharoopa Arulmighu, SA(MD)/935/2005 (MAD), decided on 4 December 2024.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Civil Procedure Code100

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

V.Sivagnanam

Parties & counsel

Outcome

Second Appeal dismissed for default; no costs awarded.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

In second appeals, if the appellant's counsel reports no instructions and the appellant does not appear, the Second Appeal is dismissed for default. No costs awarded.

A compact analysis

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.

PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 10.12.2004 made in A.S.No.27 of 2004 on the file of Subordinate Court, Karur, confirming the judgment

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

1/4

S.A(MD)No.935 of 2005

and decree dated 24.02.2004 and made in O.S.No.1161 of 1992 on the file of Additional District Munsif Court, Karur.

For Respondents : Mr.Arun Chandrasekaran for M/s.Sarvabhuman Associates

JUDGMENT

This second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 10.12.2004 made in A.S.No.24 of 2004 on the file of Subordinate Court, Karur, confirming the judgment and decree dated 24.02.2004 made in O.S.No.1169 of 1992 on the file of Additional District Munsif Court, Karur.

On perusal of records it reveals that on 13.08.2024, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant reported 'no instructions' and this Court directed the counsel for the appellant to file a memo stating 'no instructions' and also directed the Registry to print the names of the appellants. Despite

the name printed in the cause list, the appellant has not chosen to appear either in person or through counsel.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2/4

S.A(MD)No.935 of 2005

In view of the above, this Second Appeal is dismissed for default.

No costs.

04.12.2024

Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No MGA

To

1.The Subordinate Court, Karur.

2.The Additional District Munsif Court, Karur.

Copy To The Section Officer, Vernacular Records, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

3/4

S.A(MD)No.935 of 2005

V.SIVAGNANAM. J.,

MGA

Judgment made in S.A(MD)No.935 of 2005

04.12.2024

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4/4

V.Sivagnanam

CNR

HCMD010041182005

Topic

Execution and Attachment

Bench

Disposal

DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT

K.M.Murugesan Vs Vigraharoopa Arulmighu

4 Dec 2024

Thiravia Murugan Vs a.v.S.Velusamy

4 Dec 2024