Rajappa Naidu Vs Ramachandran — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rajappa Naidu Vs Ramachandran — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

CMP NO. 22701 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25-02-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. S. SUNDAR

CMP NO. 22701 of 2022

AND

SA NO. 1082 OF 2001

Rajappa Naidu

(Died) and 5 Others

Appellant(s)

Vs

RAMACHANDRAN

S/o.Govindappa Naidu, Vannampalli Village, Mallinayanapalli Post, Krishnagiri Taluk and District and 3 Others

Respondent(s)

SA NO. 1082 of 2001

1.RAJAPPA NAIDU (Died) ,S/O.GOVINDAPPA Naidu,Vannampalli Village, Mallinayanapalli Po.,Krishna -giri Tk.,Dharmapuri Dist. and 5 Others

Appellant(s)

Vs

1.Ramachandran,s/o.Govindappa Naidu, Vennampalli Village, Mullinayanapalli Po., Krishna Giri Tk., Dharmapuri Dist. and 3 Others

Respondent(s)

CMP NO. 22701 of 2022

For Appellant(s):

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

M/s.V.Nicholas N.E.A.Dinesh J.Hariharan

For Respondent(s): Mrs.V.Srimathy for R1 R-3 Rangasamy

R-4 Venkatesan

R2 - Refused

Pvt Notice

Aos Not Filed

SA NO. 1082 of 2001

For Appellant(s): M/s.V.Nicholas N.E.A.Dinesh

M/s.V.RaghavachariV.Srimathi For R1R2 And R4 - Not KnownR3 - No Such PersonSome Of The Respondents ReportedDead- Vide B/o Dt 17/2/2021 ( Steps Due)

For Respondent(s): Mr.V.Ssrimathy for R1

ORDER

Learned counsel for the 1^st respondent is present in Court. Notice

issued to respondents 3 and 4 is served on them on 17.02.2025.

However, the 2^nd respondent has refused to receive the Court notice.

This Court, therefore, takes that service is completed.

This petition is filed only to set aside the order of dismissal on

26.04.2024 for non prosecution and to restore the second appeal.

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

In the affidavit filed in support of this miscellaneous petition, the petitioners have given reasons for the non appearance on the date when the second appeal was taken up and dismissed for non

prosecution. Even the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent who is present, has no serious objections. She left the matter to the discretion of the Court.

This Court, considering the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, is convinced that the petitioners have given sufficient cause for non appearance.

Accordingly, the petition is ordered and the second appeal is

restored.

Post the second appeal in the usual course.

25-02-2025

AP

CMP NO. 22701 of 2022

To

RAMACHANDRAN

S/o.Govindappa Naidu, Vannampalli Village, Mallinayanapalli Post, Krishnagiri Taluk and District

Purushothaman

S/o.Govindappa Naidu, Vannampalli Village, Mallinayanapalli Post, Krishnagiri Taluk and District

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

3. Rangasamy

S/o.Rajappa Naidu, Vannampalli Village, Mallinayanapalli Post, Krishnagiri Taluk and District

Venkatesan

S/o.Rajappa Naidu, Vannampalli Village, Mallinayanapalli Post, Krishnagiri Taluk and District

SA NO. 1082 of 2001

1.Ramachandran,s/o.Govindappa

Naidu, Vennampalli Village, Mullinayanapalli Po., Krishna Giri Tk., Dharmapuri Dist.

2.Purushothaman,s/o.Rajappa

Naidu, Army No.1567952, 36 Fd. Copy, 8, Eng.Regiment, C/o.56 Apo.

3.Rangasamy,s/o.Rajappa Naidu,

Army No.14479995, Army No. 775/77, Medium Regiment, C/o.99 Apo.

4.Venkatesan,s/o.Rajappa Naidu

Arimyno.153056279, Campo-pln- 657, Ebgr-brid, Ge-unit, C/o.56, Apo.

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