Allowed¶33

Andy v. A.V Iqbal Ahmed Saheb (Died)

Madras HC22 Jul 2026CMP/14154/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court restoration petition; CMP allowed; second appeal dismissed for default/non-prosecution restored to file; sufficient cause for non-appearance; S.A.No.1163 of 2007; C.M.P.No.14154 of 2021; P. Dhanabal, J.; dated 22.07.2026; main appeal posted 27.07.2026; LRs of deceased first respondent brought on record 29.02.2024; no counter filed by respondents; purely procedural order, no substantive adjudication.

What did the court decide?

C.M.P.No.14154 of 2021 allowed and S.A.No.1163 of 2007 restored to the file of the High Court; main appeal directed to be posted on 27.07.2026 ¶33

Andy Vs A.V Iqbal Ahmed Saheb (Died) — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 22.07.2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶5

C.M.P.No.14154 of 2021 in

¶6

S.A.No.1163 of 2007

¶7

Andy (died)

¶8

Chinnapaiyan

¶9

Annamalai

¶10

Ramasamy

¶11

Kamalanathan

6. Mrs.P.Selvarani

..Appellants

A.V. Iqbal Ahmed Saheb (died)

¶16

The Tahsildar, Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore District.

¶17

Periyakulanthai

¶18

Mrs.Poongodi

¶19

AMSA AFSAR

¶20

A.V.MOYEED IQBAL

¶21

A.V.FARID IQBAL

¶22

(R1 – Died. R5 to R7 are brought on record as L.R’s of deceased R1 vide order of Court dated 29.02.2024).

¶23

..Respondents

¶24

__________ Page1 of 4

¶25

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

¶26

PRAYER: To restore the above second appeal to the file of this Court by setting aside the order of dismissal for non-prosecution dated 25-06-2021 in the above appeal.

¶27

For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Rajaraman For Respondents : Mr.Senthamizh Selvan, Government Counsel, For R2.

¶28

ORDER

¶29

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking restoration of the appeal, which was dismissed for default on 05.06.2021. Despite sufficient opportunity having been granted, no counter has been filed on behalf of the respondents.

¶30

Having considered the averments made in the affidavit filed in support

¶31

of the petition and the reasons assigned therein, this Court is satisfied that the petitioner has shown sufficient cause for the non-appearance on the earlier occasion. Accordingly, this petition deserves to be allowed.

¶32