Allowed¶35

Chengan (Died) v. Dhanapal (Died)

Madras HC15 Jul 2026CMP/24720/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Restoration of second appeal dismissed for default/non-prosecution; CMP No. 24720 of 2025 in S.A.No.427 of 2016; Madras High Court; Justice P. Dhanabal; Order 41 Rule 19 Civil Procedure Code; dismissal dated 07.02.2019 set aside; delay condonation already allowed; no counter filed by respondents; appeal restored and listed for 24.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

Civil Miscellaneous Petition allowed; order of dismissal for default dated 7.2.2019 in S.A.No.427 of 2016 to be set aside and the Second Appeal restored, with the main Second Appeal to be listed on 24.07.2026. ¶35

Chengan (Died) Vs Dhanapal (Died) — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CMP No. 24720 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 15-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶6

CMP No. 24720 of 2025 in S.A.No.427 of 2016

¶7

Chengan (died) 1.Karuppasamy, S/o.late Chengam,

¶8

2.Munusamy

¶9

3.Ganapathy

¶10

4.Lakshmi

¶11

5.Minor.Aravind

¶12

6.Minor Hemanathan

¶13

(Minor Petitioners 5 & 6 are rep. By their mother

¶14

& natural guardian, 4^th petitioner, Lakshmi)

¶15

..Petitioner(s)

¶16

¶17

Dhanapal (died) 1.Kuppu

¶18

Kabeeran

¶19

Elumalai,

¶20

Kamalakkannan

¶21

Ponngavanam

¶22

Chinnapapa

¶23

Manickam

¶24

8. Thoppalan

¶25

..Respondent(s)

¶26

Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed under Order 41 Rule 19 of Civil Procedure Code to set aside the order of dismissal for default dated 7.2.2019 passed by this Court in the above second appeal in SA.No.427 of 2016 and to restore the above Second Appeal.

¶27

For Appellant(s): Mr.R.Narayanan For Respondent(s): Mr.S.R.Rajarajan

¶28

__________ Page1 of 4

¶29

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

¶30

CMP No. 24720 of 2025

¶31

ORDER

¶32

This Petition has been filed to restore the Second Appeal No.427 of 2016, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 07.02.2019.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the documents placed on record.

¶34

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the reasons stated by the petitioners in the affidavit filed in support of this petition and the other side also not filed any counter, despite several opportunities were given to them and in order to provide fair chance to the petitioners and taking note of the fact that already this Court also allowed the petition to condone the delay in filing the present petition, this Court is inclined to allow the petition.

¶35