Dismissed¶33

Prema Rajappan v. Parvathy

Madras HC17 Jul 2025AS/471/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court first appeal (Section 96 CPC) dismissed for non-prosecution; Prema Rajappan (appellant) v. Parvathy and 13 other respondents; challenge to judgment and decree dated 29.08.2022 in O.S.No.39 of 2015, District Court, The Nilgiris, Udhagamandalam; appellant absent on more than four hearings since 20.06.2025; adjournment request refused on 17.07.2025; connected CMPs 17228 & 17664 of 2022 closed; no costs; single judge Dr. Justice G. Jayachandran; decision date 17.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

The Court declined to grant any further adjournment to the appellant despite his request on the hearing date, given his repeated absence since 20.06.2025. ¶32

Prema Rajappan Vs Parvathy — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

A.S.No.471 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 17.07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

A.S.No.471 of 2022 and C.M.P.Nos.17228 & 17664 of 2022

Prema Rajappan

... Appellant

Vs.

Parvathy

¶11

Mathiparameshwari @ Akkama

¶12

V.Padma

¶13

Mathiammal

¶14

S.Shanthi

¶15

S.Prema

¶16

Saroja

¶17

S.Sudha

¶18

Shanthana Krishnan

¶19

S.Poongudi

¶20

S.Sangeetha

¶21

S.Vijayaraj

¶22

R.Neegi

¶23

Neela ... Respondents

¶24

PRAYER : Appeal Suit filed under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure to set aside the judgment and decree dated 29.08.2022 passed in O.S.No.39 of 2015 on the file of the District Court, The Nilgiris, Udhagamandalam and to allow the first appeal.

¶25

Page 1 of 3

¶26

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

¶27

A.S.No.471 of 2022

¶28

For Appellants : Mr.Naveen Kumar Murthi For R1 to R4 : Mr.K .Thilageswaran For R7 to R13 : M/s.T.Kalaiarasi R5, R6 & R14 : M/s.M.Muthu Yazhini

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

The matter, having been listed for final hearing since 20.06.2025

¶31

on more than four occasions, there was no representation for the appellant. Particularly, on 11.07.2025, the absence of the appellant was recorded and the matter was posted for hearing today (17.07.2025).

¶32

Today, there is a representation on the side of the appellant stating that he is not ready to conduct the appeal today and seeks an adjournment. This Court is not inclined to grant any further adjournments.

¶33