Two second appeals under Section 100 CPC against decrees in property suits were dismissed for default as appellants gave no instructions and made no appearance.
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.
S.A.Nos.580 & 587 of 2003
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 01.07.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
S.A.Nos.580 & 587 of 2003 and
C.M.P.No.5274 of 2003
S.A.No.580 of 2003:
3.Minor Suresh Minor Appellants 2 and 3 represented by their mother and guardian Meenambal.
... Defendants 3 to 5/
Respondents 2 to 4/ Appellants
Vs.
1.S.Subramanian
2.Mahamayee ... Plaintiffs & D-2/ Appellant & R-2/ Respondents
PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, against the judgment and decree, dated 11.02.2022 in A.S.No.33 of 2001 on the file of the Principal District Court, Pudukottai, reversing the judgment and decree in counter claim in
1/5
S.A.Nos.580 & 587 of 2003
O.S.No.271 of 1997 on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Pudukottai, dated 20.10.2000.
For Appellants : No appearance
For Respondents : No appearance
S.A.No.587 of 2003:
1.K.Vijayakumar
2.K.Kamalesh Babu Both the appellants are represented by their power of attorney, Mary Stella Dass. ... Defendants 1 and 2/Appellants Appellants
Vs.
1.K.Annammal ... Plaintiff/1st Respondent/ 1st Respondent
2.K.A.Thomas
3.Sankaran
4.Chidambara Vadivu ... Defendants 3 to 5/ Respondents 2 to 4/ Respondents 2 to 4
(The respondents 2 and 4 / the defendants 3 and 5 remained ex parte in both the suit and the first appeal)
(The respondents 2 and 4 remained ex parte in the Courts below and hence, they are given up)
PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil 2/5
S.A.Nos.580 & 587 of 2003
Procedure Code, 1908, against the judgment and decree of the learned II Additional District Judge, Nagercoil passed in A.S.No.75 of 2001 on 24.06.2002, confirming the decree and judgment of the Trial Court, the learned Additional District Munsif, Nagercoil passed in O.S.No.391 of 1981 on 31.01.1997.
For Appellants : No appearance For R-1 : Mr.K.Sreekumaran Nair
COMMON JUDGMENT
The learned Counsel appearing for the appellants in S.A.No.580 of 2003 filed a Memo reporting “No instructions” on 27.06.2025. The Registry was directed to print the names of the appellants. In S.A.No.587 of 2003, there was no representation on the side of the appellants on 27.06.2025. Hence, the matter is listed today under the caption “For Dismissal”. Even today, there is no representation on the side of the appellants in either appeal. Therefore, both Second Appeals stand dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed.
01.07.2025
NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes BTR
3/5
S.A.Nos.580 & 587 of 2003
To
4/5
S.A.Nos.580 & 587 of 2003
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
BTR
Judgment made in S.A.Nos.580 & 587 of 2003
Dated: 01.07.2025
5/5
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Muthukumar
Minor Ramesh
Minor Suresh
S.Subramanian
Mahamayee
K.Vijayakumar
R.Vijayakumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
