Ponnuchamy v. Meenakshisundaram
Case brief
What is this about?
Dismissal for default; second appeal; S.A.No.1867 of 2003; C.M.P.No.19597 of 2003; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; R. Vijayakumar; decision date 15.07.2025; no instructions memo 24.06.2025; Section 100 Civil Procedure Code 1908; A.S.No.232 of 2001; Subordinate Judge Aruppukottai; O.S.No.51 of 1994; District Munsif Aruppukottai; appellants Ponnuchamy and M.T.M.Selvam (Defendants 2 and 5); plaintiff/respondent Meenakshisundaram; respondents V.Rajagopal, Sangumuthu, Dharmarajan; counsel A.Srinivasan for Respondent 3; no order as to costs; appeal not adjudicated on merits — not citable for any substantive legal proposition.
What did the court decide?
The Second Appeal was dismissed for default because the appellants had no representation: their counsel had filed a memo reporting 'No instructions' and nobody appeared on their side when the matter was listed under the caption 'For Dismissal'; no order was made as to costs and the connected Miscellaneous Petition (C.M.P.No.19597 of 2003) was closed. No merits of the underlying suit were examined.