Alava Udayar vs Kuppu Udayar
2021 Latest Caselaw 13354 Mad

                                                                                  S.A.No.827 of 2005

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 06.07.2021

                                                          CORAM:

                                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                                      S.A.No.827 of 2005

                     Alava Udayar                                                       ...Appellant

                                                             vs.

                     1.Kuppu Udayar

                     2.Duraisamy

                     3.Subraya Udayar                                     ...Respondents
                     Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the

                     Judgment and Decree dated 31.12.2004 made in A.S.No.111 of 2003 on

                     the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge at Tindivanam, reversing the

                     Judgment and Decree dated 21.01.2003 made in O.S.No.222 of 1998 on

                     the file of the Principal District Munsiff at Tindivanam.

                                      For Appellant       : Ms.N.Mala

                                      For Respondents     : R1 – Died

                                                            R2 – Insufficient Address

                                                            R3 – Gone to Madras




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                     1/2
                                                                                S.A.No.827 of 2005

                                                                       ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

                                                                                             pam

                                                      JUDGMENT

This Court by its earlier order dated 19.04.2021 made it clear that

if steps are not taken to bring on record the legal representatives of the

deceased fourth respondent before the next hearing date, the Second

Appeal shall stand automatically dismissed for non-prosecution. Till

date, steps have not been taken to bring on record the legal

representatives of the deceased fourth respondent. The Second Appeal is

of the year 2005. It can now be inferred that the Appellant is not

interested in prosecuting the Second Appeal. Accordingly, this Second

Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.

06.07.2021

Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order pam

S.A.No.827 of 2005

To

1.The Principal Subordinate Judge at Tindivanam.

2.The Principal District Munsiff at Tindivanam. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/