Dismissed¶44

Arumugham(died) v. Nithyanandam

Madras HC26 Mar 2026SA/1898/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

S.A.No.1898 of 2003, High Court of Judicature at Madras, R. Sakthivel J., decided 26/03/2026: Second Appeal under Section 100 CPC DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION; appellant's counsel V. Srimathi reported 'no instructions'; appellants 2 to 6 (LRs of deceased first appellant Arumugham, brought on record 26/02/2024 in C.M.P.Nos.3483, 3477 & 3481 of 2024) absent despite names printed per Daily Order dated 12/03/2026; appeal sought to set aside A.S.No.28 of 2003 (Fast Track Court-II Tindivanam, Judgment and Decree dated 24/06/2023) reversing O.S.No.629 of 1993 (Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam, Judgment and Decree dated 30/03/2001); no order as to costs; no merits adjudication, no precedent value on the underlying dispute.

What did the court decide?

None; the Second Appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution and there was no order as to costs.

Arumugham(died) Vs Nithyanandam — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

S.A.NO.1898 OF 2003

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED :26/03/2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL

¶6

S.A.NO.1898 OF 2003

¶7

Arumugham (Died) S/o.Rajamanicka Mudaliar, Kamatchi Illam, Zameendhar Garden, Pondicherry.

¶8

...Appellant/ 1^st Respondent/ Plaintiff

¶9

2.Sarasvathy W/o.Late Arumugam

¶10

3.Dhanam D/o.Late Arumugam

¶11

4.Anita D/o.Late Arumugam

¶12

5.Ally D/o.Late Arumugam

¶13

6.Vaithiyanathan S/o.Late Arumugam A1 Died, A2 to A6 are brought on record as LRs of the deceased 1^st Appellant vide Court Order dated February 26, 2024 made in C.M.P.Nos.3483, 3477 & 3481 of 2024 in S.A.No.1898 of 2003

¶14

... Appellants 2 to 6/Legal Representatives of the deceased 1^st AppellantArumugham

¶15

Page No.1 of 6

¶16

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

¶17

S.A.NO.1898 OF 2003

¶18

Vs.

¶19

1.Nithyanandam S/o.Ramadoss

¶20

2.Vijayanandam S/o.Ramadoss

¶21

3.Premanandhan S/o.Ramadoss 4.Kaliammal W/o.Arjunan ...Respondents/Appellants/ Defendants 7 to 9 & 11 All are residing at Marakkanam Village, Tindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District. 5.Chandiran, S/o.Arjunan, 50, Sankaradass Street, Pondicherry. 6.Rajeswari, W/o.Kanthaswamy, 2, Sundara Vinayakar Koil Street, Gingee, Villupuram District.

¶22

... Respondents/Respondents 2 to 3/ Legal Representative of 10^th & 6^th Defendant

¶23

PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil

¶24

Procedure, 1908, praying to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated June 24, 2023 made in A.S.No.28 of 2003 on the file of the Fast Track Court-II

¶25

Page No.2 of 6

¶26

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

¶27

S.A.NO.1898 OF 2003

¶28

Tindivanam, reversing the Judgment and Decree dated March 30, 2001 in

¶29

O.S.No.629 of 1993 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam.

¶30

For Appellant : Ms.V.Srimathi

¶31

For Respondents-2 to 4 & 6 : Mr.J.Prithvi for Mr.Kaithamalai Kumaran

¶32

JUDG MENT

¶33

Daily Order dated March 12, 2026 reads thus:

¶34

“Ms.Anvitha.R, representing Mrs.V.Srimathi, Counsel on record for the Appellant and Mr.I.Pragadeesh, representing Mr.S.Kaithamalai Kumaran, Counsel on record for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and 6, are before this Court.

¶35

2. Representing Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Counsel on record has handed over the case file to the Appellant. He seeks a week’s time to file necessary memo in this regard.

¶36

3. In view of the above submissions, Registry is directed to print the name of the Appellant in the cause list in the next hearing day.

¶37

4. List the matter on 26.03.2026.”

¶38

Page No.3 of 6

¶39

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

¶40

S.A.NO.1898 OF 2003

¶41

2.Ms.V.Srimathi, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant

¶42

reports “no instructions” and also filed a memo to that effect.

¶43

3.Pursuant to the Order dated March 12, 2026, the names of the

¶44

Appellants 2 to 6 have been shown in the cause list. Despite names printed, the Appellants 2 to 6 did not choose to appear and argue the Second Appeal. Under such circumstances, this Court has no other option except to dismiss the Second Appeal for non-prosecution. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶45

26/03/2026 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No pam

¶46

Page No.4 of 6

¶47

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

¶48

S.A.NO.1898 OF 2003

¶49

¶50