Dismissed¶25

Adhilakshmi v. the Additional Digp

Madras HC15 Dec 2025SA/851/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court second appeal (S.A.) dismissed solely for non-prosecution due to repeated absence of the appellant's representation; filed under Section 100 CPC against a first-appeal decree that had reversed the trial court decree; no merits, issues or precedent treatments arise from this judgment; relevant only for disposal-for-non-prosecution practice points (successive 'for dismissal' captions, no costs, connected miscellaneous petition closed).

What the court decided

AI extract

Adhilakshmi Vs the Additional Digp — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

S.A.No.851 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated: 15.12.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL

¶6

S.A.No.851 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

Adhilakshmi

... Appellant

Vs.

1.The Additional DIGP GC, CRPF, Pallipuram, Tiruvandrum, Kerala 695 316. 2.Bhagyalakshmi

¶11

3.Minor.Pravin Kumar

¶12

4.Minor.Nandini (Respondents No.3 & 4 represented by the 2^nd respondent mother/Guardian Bhagyalakshmi) ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 18.11.2011 made in A.S.No.55 of 2010 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Vellore reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 16.06.2009 made in O.S.No.763 of 2007 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Vellore.

¶14

For Appellant : Mr.S.Raja Ravi Varma For R1 : Mr.V.Ashok Kumar

¶15

1/3

¶16

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

¶17

S.A.No.851 of 2015

¶18

For R2 to R4 : Mr.W.M.Abdul Azeez

P.DHANABAL, J.

kkd

JUDGMENT

When the matter came up for hearing on 25.10.2025, there was no

¶23

representation for the appellant, whereas the learned counsel for the respondent was present before this Court. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption for dismissal on 17.11.2025. Again, when the matter was listed, there was no representation on the side of the appellant and therefore, the second appeal was directed to be listed under the caption "for dismissal".

¶24

Today, once again, the matter was listed under the caption "for

¶25

dismissal". On all these occasions, there was no representation on the side of the appellant. Therefore, this Second Appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

¶26

15.12.2025

¶27

kkd To

¶28

1.The Subordinate Court, Vellore 2/3

¶29

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

¶30

S.A.No.851 of 2015

¶31

2.The Principal District Munsif Court, Vellore.