Dismissed¶28

Sundaram v. Thangaraj

Madras HC25 Oct 2025SA/75/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: dismissal of second appeal for non-prosecution; default dismissal for want of prosecution; no appearance by appellants; counsel reporting 'no instructions'; deletion of counsel's name from cause-list; out-of-court settlement intimated by respondents' counsel; Section 100 CPC second appeal; A.S.No.67 of 2006 (Principal Subordinate Judge, Villupuram) confirming O.S.No.432 of 2004 (Additional District Munsif, Villupuram); Madras High Court, single judge (Mummineni Sudheer Kumar), decided 25-10-2025; no costs. Cite, if at all, only for procedural practice on non-prosecution dismissals — no substantive property-law holding was rendered.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted to the appellants; the Second Appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution and no costs were awarded. ¶28

Sundaram Vs Thangaraj — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1/4

¶2

S.A.No.75 of 2008

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

DATED :: 25-10-2025

¶5

CORAM

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶7

SECOND APPEAL No.75 of 2008

¶8

1.Sundaram 2.Prakash 3.Sudha ... Appellants -vs1.Thangaraj 2.Valliyammal 3.Muniyammal 4.Anjalakshi 5.Jayalakshmi ... Respondents

¶9

Appeal under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment

¶10

and decree, dated 15.03.2007, passed in A.S.No.67 of 2006, on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge,Villupuram, confirming the judgment and decree, dated 02.11.2005, passed in O.S.No.432 of 2004, on the file of Additional District Munsif, Villupuram.

¶11

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

¶12

2/4

¶13

S.A.No.75 of 2008

¶14

For Appellants : No appearance

¶15

For Respondent 1 : Appeal dismissed vide Court order, dated 15.02.2023.

¶16

For Respondents 2 to 5: Mr.R.Ragoth,

¶17

for Mr.K.Selvaraj

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

This matter earlier came up for consideration before this Court on 10.10.2025. As there was no representation for the appellants, this Court passed the following order :

¶20

''It is represented by learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 5 that the matter has been settled between the parties out of court.

¶21

2. Though learned counsel who was appearing for the appellants reported no instructions on 28.04.2025 and accordingly this court directed the registry to print the name of the appellants in the cause-list, today, in spite of printing the name of the appellants, there is no representation for the appellants. In view of the same, list the matter under the caption ''For Dismissal'' on 17.10.2025.

¶22

3. Registry is directed to delete the name of Mr.N.Suresh Sundaram from the cause-list.''

¶23

In terms of the above said direction, the matter is listed today under the caption ''For Dismissal''. In spite of the same, there is no representation for the appellants.

¶24

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

¶25

3/4

¶26

S.A.No.75 of 2008

¶27