P.M.Ramakrishnan vs T.K.Jayakrishnan
2023 Latest Caselaw 3727 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1945
                          AS NO. 387 OF 2002
AGAINST THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT DATED 30.03.2000 IN OS 12/1994 OF
                       SUB COURT, SULTHANBATHERY
APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:

             RAMAKRISHNAN P.M., S/O MANIKKAN PILLAI,
             WEST AND CO. ENGINEERING WORKS, OPPOSITE, INDIRA GANDHI
             STADIUM, COIMBATORE ROAD, SULTHAN PET, PALAKKAD TOWN
             AND TALUK, PALGHAT DISTRICT.
             BY ADV.SRI.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN


RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:

             T.K.JAYAKRISHNAN, PROPRIETOR,
             JAITHRA FILM EXHIBITORS, KOTTATHARA VILLAGE,
             KALPETTA POST, VYTHIRI TALUK, WYNAD DISTRICT.




     THIS APPEAL SUITS HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 29.03.2023,
ALONG WITH AS.20/2002, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 AS Nos.387/2002, 20/2002
                                   2



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1945
                           AS NO. 20 OF 2002
AGAINST THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT DATED 30.03.2000 IN OS 12/1994 OF
                       SUB COURT, SULTHANBATHERY
APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:

             T.K.JAYAKRISHNAN, PROPRIETOR,
             JAITHRA FILM EXHIBITORS, KALPETTA POST,
             KOTTATHARA VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WYNAD DISTRICT.
             BY ADVS.
             SRI.T.A.RAMADASAN
             SRI.A.K.ALEX


RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:

             P.M.RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O MANIKKAN PILLAI,
             PROPRIETOR, WEST AND CO.ENGINEERING WORKS,, OPP.INDIRA
             GANDHI STADIUM, COIMBARORE ROAD, SULTHANPET, PALAKKAD
             TOWN & TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST.

             BY ADV.SRI.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN


     THIS APPEAL SUITS HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 29.03.2023,
ALONG WITH AS.387/2002, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 AS Nos.387/2002, 20/2002
                                   3

                              JUDGMENT

The appellant and the counsel remained

absent. The appeal is of the year 2002. Now

almost 20 years have elapsed. The appeal so far,

is not admitted. This would show what is behind

it. Hence, the absence of the counsel cannot be

condoned. Both the appeals are dismissed for non

prosecution.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE msp