Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Thiru.Mohan Vs Thiru.Nivelan Ambalam — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Madras HC
2025
Thiru.Mohan Vs Thiru.Nivelan AmbalamThiru.Mohan v. Thiru.Nivelan Ambalam

Dismissed¶23

Thiru.Mohan v. Thiru.Nivelan Ambalam

Madras HC22 Jan 2025SA(MD)/448/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeal dismissed for default; appellant absent for the third time; no appearance by either side; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; single judge V. Sivagnanam; decided 22.01.2025; appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code; challenges Judgment and Decree dated 30.4.2004 in A.S.No.128 of 2002 (Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul) reversing Judgment and Decree dated 25.09.2001 in O.S.No.1658 of 1993; parties: Mohan / Poosari Arulmigu Akkasa Kannimar Temple (power agent Mr. Dharmalingam) as appellant; N.K.Raju (died), Nivelan Ambalam, Kaliammal, Karuppan Ambalam, Subbammal, Muthammal and Kasthuri as respondents; Muthammal and Kasthuri given up; no costs; connected C.M.P(MD)No.2393 of 2004 closed; no substantive issue adjudicated.

What did the court decide?

With no representation on the appellant's side and the appellant absent for the third time, the second appeal S.A.(MD)No.448 of 2004 is dismissed for default.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Ratio / Principle

With no representation on the appellant's side and the appellant absent for the third time, the second appeal S.A.(MD)No.448 of 2004 is dismissed for default.

Key takeaways

No costs are awarded and the connected miscellaneous petition (C.M.P(MD)No.2393 of 2004) is likewise closed.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

S.A.(MD)No.448 of 2004 (with connected C.M.P(MD)No.2393 of 2004), Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, V. Sivagnanam J., 22.01.2025: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and Decree dated 30.4.2004 in A.S.No.128 of 2002 passed by the Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul, which had reversed the Judgment and Decree dated 25.09.2001 in O.S.No.1658 of 1993. When the matter was taken up for hearing, there was no representation on either side and the appellant (Mohan, Poosari Arulmigu Akkasa Kannimar Temple, through its power agent Mr. Dharmalingam) remained absent for the third time. Held: the second appeal is dismissed for default; no costs; the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. No substantive issue was adjudicated.

A

S.A.(MD)No.448 of 2004

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 22.01.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

S.A.(MD)No.448 of 2004 and C.M.P(MD)No.2393 of 2004

Mohan, Poosari Arulmigu Akkasa Kannimar Temple, Sanarpatti Village, Dindigul Taluk, Dindigul District. through its power agent Mr.Dharmalingam ...Appellant/4^th Respondent/4^th Defendant in A.S.No.128 of 2002. N.K.Raju(died) ...1^st Respondent/1^st Defendant in A.S.No.128 of 2002 in O.S.No.1658 of 1993 -Vs1.Nivelan Ambalam ...1^st Respondent/1^st Appellant/1^st Plaintiff in A.S.No.128 of 2002 in O.S.No.1658 of 1993 2.Kaliammal ...2^nd Respondent/2^nd Appellant/2^nd Plaintiff in A.S.No.128 of 2002 in O.S.No.1658 of 1993 3.Karuppan Ambalam ...3^rd Respondent/3^rd Appellant/3^rd Plaintiff's in A.S.No.128 of 2002 in O.S.No.1658 of 1993 4.Subbammal ...4^th Respondent/4^th Appellant/4^th Plaintiff in A.S.No.128 of 2002 in O.S.No.1658 of 1993

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

Page 1 of 4

S.A.(MD)No.448 of 2004

5.Muthammal

...5^th Respondent/2^nd Respondent/2^nd Defendant in A.S.No.128 of 2002 in O.S.No.1658 of 1993 (Given up - since no relief is sought against)

6.Kasthuri ...Defendants/Respondents/Respondents in A.S.No.128 of 2002 in O.S.No.1658 of 1993 (Given up - since no relief is sought against)

Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the Judgment and Decree dated 30.4.2004 passed in A.S.No.128 of 2002 by the Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul, Dindigul District reversing the Judgment and Decree, dated 25.09.2001 passed in O.S.No.1658 of 1993.

For Appellants : No appearance For Respondents : No appearance * * * * *

JUDGMENT

This Second Appeal has been filed against the Judgment and Decree dated 30.4.2004 passed in A.S.No.128 of 2002 by the Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul, Dindigul District reversing the Judgment and Decree, dated 25.09.2001 passed in O.S.No.1658 of 1993.

2.When the matter was taken up for hearing, there is no representation on

the side of the appellant. The appellant remained absent for the third time.

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

Page 2 of 4

S.A.(MD)No.448 of 2004

3.In view of the above, this second appeal is dismissed for default.

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

22.01.2025 1/2

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No RJR

To

1.The Principal Sub Court, Dindigul, Dindigul District. 2.The 1^st Additional District Munsif Court, Dindigul. 3.The Section Officer, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

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

Page 3 of 4

S.A.(MD)No.448 of 2004

V.SIVAGNANAM. J,

RJR

S.A.(MD)No.448 of 2004

22.01.2025 1/2

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

Page 4 of 4

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Civil Procedure Code100¶14

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment and Decree dated 30.4.2004 in A.S.No.128 of 2002 passed by the Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul, Dindigul District, reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 25.09.2001 passed in O.S.No.1658 of 1993.¶17
Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul, Dindigul District · 30.4.2004
Prior proceeding
Trial suit O.S.No.1658 of 1993 concluded with a Judgment and Decree dated 25.09.2001, which the first appellate court subsequently reversed.¶17
Prior proceeding
First appeal decided as A.S.No.128 of 2002 by the Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul; its Judgment and Decree dated 30.4.2004 is the decision challenged in this second appeal.¶17
Prior proceeding
Connected miscellaneous petition C.M.P(MD)No.2393 of 2004 accompanies the second appeal.¶6
Prior proceeding
When the matter was taken up for hearing, there was no representation on the appellant's side; the appellant remained absent for the third time.¶19

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Mohan, Poosari Arulmigu Akkasa Kannimar Temple, Sanarpatti Village, Dindigul Taluk, Dindigul District. through its power agent Mr.Dharmalingam¶7
respondent
N.K.Raju(died)¶7
respondent
Nivelan Ambalam¶7
respondent
Kaliammal¶7
respondent
Karuppan Ambalam¶7
respondent
Subbammal¶7
respondent
Muthammal¶12
respondent
Kasthuri¶13

Coram

AI extract

V.SIVAGNANAMauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 22 Jan 2025 · January
Registered: 14 Dec 2004
Case no.: SA(MD)/448/2004
CNR: HCMD010021902004
Bench: V.sivagnanam
Disposal: DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT
Case type: S.A.(MD)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from V.sivagnanam

Seeni Thangam Vs the State of Tamil Nadu
21 Jan 2025
Sivakumar Vs Executive Engineer
21 Jan 2025
N.Jeevanesan Vs Chelliah @ Govindan Chettiar
21 Jan 2025
Thiru.Mohan Vs Karuppan Ambalam
22 Jan 2025
K.Ravi Vs M/S. Bannari Amman Sugars
22 Jan 2025
Annamayil Vs Vasuki
23 Jan 2025

Cite this judgement

Thiru.Mohan v. Thiru.Nivelan Ambalam, SA(MD)/448/2004 (MAD), decided on 22 January 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Civil Procedure Code100

View all statutes

Procedural history5

Judgment and Decree dated 30.4.2004 in A.S.No.128 of 2002 passed by the Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul, Dindigul District, reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 25.09.2001 passed in O.S.No.1658 of 1993.Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul, Dindigul District · 30.4.2004
Trial suit O.S.No.1658 of 1993 concluded with a Judgment and Decree dated 25.09.2001, which the first appellate court subsequently reversed.
First appeal decided as A.S.No.128 of 2002 by the Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul; its Judgment and Decree dated 30.4.2004 is the decision challenged in this second appeal.

View full history

Bench / Coram

V.SIVAGNANAM

Parties & counsel