Dismissed¶34

Rathinal v. Kannammal

Madras HC6 Mar 2026SA/33/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; second appeal dismissed for default; dismissal for non-representation / no appearance; appellants' counsel reported 'no instructions' 21.10.2024; notice returned 'no such addressee'; Section 100 CPC; AS No.46/2017 Subordinate Judge Sathyamangalam; OS No.22/2016 District Munsif Court Sathyamangalam; decree dated 04.08.2017 confirmed by decree dated 11.04.2018; Erode district / Sathyamangalam; CMP No.645 of 2022 closed; no order as to costs; Justice S. Sounthar; decided 06-03-2026.

What did the court decide?

The second appeal is dismissed as default owing to continued absence of representation for the appellants. ¶34

Rathinal Vs Kannammal — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

SA No. 33 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 06-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR

¶6

SA No. 33 of 2022 and CMP No.645 of 2022

¶7

Rathinal, W/o. Chinnaraj,

¶8

Vijayal, W/o. Subramaniam, R1 and R2 are residing at Pasuvapalayam, Pudupeerkadavu Village, Sathyamangalam Tk, Erode Dt.

¶9

Sagunthala W/o. Subramaniam, Mani Nagar, Rangampalayam, Periyakallipatti, Sathyamangalam Tk, Erode Dt.

¶10

Jayachitra W/o. Late. Velusami,

¶11

Minor. Sowmiya Rep By Mother Jayachitra, D/o. Late. Velusami,

¶12

Ramesh

¶13

S/o. Late. Velusami,

¶14

Kanmani, D/o. Late. Velusami, R4 to R7 are residing at No.2/164, Thekkala Thottam, Pasuvapalayam, Pudupeerkadavu Village, Thayamangalam Tk, Erode Dt.

¶15

..Appellant(s)

¶16

¶17

Kannammal, W/o. Raju, Uththandiyur, Sathyamangalam Tk, Erode Dt.

¶18

Mariammal, W/o. Marisami,

¶19

__________ Page1 of 4

¶20

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

¶21

SA No. 33 of 2022

¶22

Ponnammal, W/o. Ponnusamy

¶23

Thulasiammal, W/o. Manian, R2 to R4 are residing at Pasuvapalayam, Pudupeerkadavu Village, Sathyamangalam Tk, Erode District.

¶24

..Respondent(s)

¶25

Prayer: Second appeal is filed under Section 100 of CPC to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 11.04.2018 passed in AS No.46/2017 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Sathyamangalam confirming the Decree and Judgment passed in OS No.22/2016 on the file of District Munsif Court, Sathyamangalam dated 04.08.2017.

¶26

For Appellant(s): No appearance

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

It is seen from the records that the learned counsel, who entered appearance for the appellants reported ‘no instructions’ as early as on 21.10.2024 and hence, as per order, notice was issued to the appellants. Thereafter, notice has been served to the appellants 4, 5, 6 and 7 and the notice taken to the other appellants were returned with an endorsement “ no such addressee ”. Till date, no other counsel entered appearance for appellants.

¶29

When the matter was came up for hearing on 04.03.2026, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants in the forenoon as well as afternoon.

¶30

Page2 of 4

¶31

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

¶32

SA No. 33 of 2022

¶33

Therefore, Registry was directed to list the second appeal under the caption “for dismissal” on 06.03.2026. Even today, there is no representation for the appellants.

¶34