Madras High Court
Perumal vs Murugan on 23 December, 2021
S.A.Nos.290 and 291 of 2010
&
C.R.P (NPD).No.2555 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. PONGIAPPAN
S.A.Nos.290 and 291 of 2010
and
M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2010
and
C.R.P(NPD) No.2555 of 2010
1.Perumal
2.Selvaraj .. Appellants in both S.As.
and in C.R.P.
Vs
1.Murugan
2.Ramadoss
3.Muthu
4.Chandrasekaran
5.Kathirvelu
6.Yesothammal
7.Devakiammal
8.Parimala
9.Saravanan
10.Sathishkumar .. Respondents in both S.As.
(Respondents 5 to 10 are not contesting and in C.R.P.
parties. Therefore they are not necessary
parties in the present C.R.P. and they are
hereby given up)
Prayer in both Second Appeals: The Second Appeals are filed under
Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree of the learned
Principal Subordinate Judge of Chengalpattu dated 14.09.2009 in
A.S.Nos.117 of 2006 and 83 of 2008, respectively, confirming the
judgement and decree of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial
Magistrate of Thirukazhukundram dated 23.11.2006 in O.S.Nos.76 and
75 of 2003, respectively.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
S.A.Nos.290 and 291 of 2010
&
C.R.P (NPD).No.2555 of 2010
Prayer in Civil Revision Petition: This Civil Revision Petition is filed
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and
decreetal orders of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge of
Chengalpattu dated 14.09.2009 in I.A.No.128 of 2009 in A.S.No.83 of
2008.
In both Second Appeals
For Appellants : No appearance
For Respondents-1 to 4 : Mr.K.Goviganesan
For Respondents-5,6 & 9 : No appearance
For Respondents-7,8 & 10: Not ready in notice
In Civil Revision Petition
For Appellants : No appearance
For Respondents-1 to 4 : Mr.K.Goviganesan
For Respondents-5 to 10 : Given up
COMMON JUDGMENT
On 09.12.2021, when these cases were came up for hearing,
Mr.Vigneshwar (Enrl.No.1720/2014), learned counsel for the
appellants/revision petitioners appeared before this and reported “No
Instructions” from the appellants/revision petitioners. Hence, in view of
the same after recording the said submission, this Court directed the
Registry to print the name of the appellants/revision petitioners in the
cause-list and to list these matters under the caption 'For Dismissal' on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/4
S.A.Nos.290 and 291 of 2010
&
C.R.P (NPD).No.2555 of 2010
23.12.2021. Accordingly, these cases were listed today under the
caption 'For dismissal'.
2. Today, (i.e.23.12.2021), though the names of the
appellants/revision petitioners are printed in the cause-list, there is no
representation on behalf of the appellants/revision petitioners either in
person or through counsel. The learned counsel appearing for the
respondents 1 to 4 is present. Therefore, the non appearance of
appellants/revision petitioners shows that they are not interested in
proceeding with these second appeals and revision petition.
3. Hence, in view of the above, these Second Appeals are
dismissed for default. Since the Second Appeals are dismissed for
default, the Civil Revision Petition, which has been filed challenging the
order passed in I.A.No.128 of 2009 in A.S.No.83 of 2008 is also
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions
are closed.
23.12.2021
Internet : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
rsi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/4
S.A.Nos.290 and 291 of 2010
&
C.R.P (NPD).No.2555 of 2010
R. PONGIAPPAN, J.
rsi
To
1.The Principal Subordinate Judge,
Chengalpattu.
2.The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate
Thirukazhukundram.
S.A.Nos.290 and 291 of 2010
and
M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2010
and
C.R.P(NPD) No.2555 of 2010
23.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
