The appellate court dismissed the Second Appeal for default on 23.09.2015 after noting that the appellants made no representation despite the matter being listed for dismissal as they appeared to be uninterested in prosecuting the appeal.
The Second Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI
Second Appeal No.167 of 2000
JUDGMENT:
As there was no representation for the appellants on 09.09.2015, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption ‘For Dismissal’. Despite listing the matter under the caption ‘For Dismissal’, there is no representation for the appellants. It indicates that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal.
Therefore, the Second Appeal is dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this appeal shall stand closed.
__________________ M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J
23.09.2015 Vjl
M. Seetharama Murti
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
