Duraisamy v. Chinama
Case brief
What is this about?
Dismissal for default (want of prosecution) of a second appeal under Section 100 of CPC, High Court of Judicature at Madras, S. Sounthar, J., 27-04-2026. Appellant Duraisamy appeared neither on 06.04.2026 nor on 22.04.2026 nor on 27.04.2026 when the matter was listed under the caption 'for dismissal'; respondent Chinama (through a power-of-attorney agent) was represented by counsel R.Subramanian. The appeal challenged the AS No.11/2016 judgment and decree dated 29.11.2019 (Subordinate Judge, Vaniyambadi), which had reversed the OS No.66/2013 judgment and decree dated 06.11.2015 (Principal District Munsif, Vaniyambadi). Appeal dismissed for default; no order as to costs; connected CMP No.13217 2020 closed. Relevant to non-prosecution / dismissal-for-default practice rather than to any substantive doctrine.
What did the court decide?
The appellant's continued non-appearance on successive hearing dates shows that he is not interested in prosecuting the second appeal; accordingly, the second appeal is dismissed for default.