Umed Kanwar vs Thayalnayaki
2021 Latest Caselaw 14594 Mad

                                                                                    S.A. No.278 of 2006


                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED : 20.07.2021

                                                         CORAM

                               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                                S.A. No.278 of 2006 &
                                             CM.P.Nos.3989 & 3990 of 2006

                     Umed Kanwar                                              ...    Appellant
                                                          Vs

                     1.Thayalnayaki
                     2.Sukumaran                                              ...   Respondents

                     PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 C.P.C. against the
                     Judgment and Decree passed in A.S.No.231 of 2002 on the file of the
                     Additional District and Sessions Court, (FTC-3), Chennai dated 19.11.2004
                     confirming the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.2160 of 2000 dated
                     19.09.2001 on the file of the XVI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court,
                     Chennai.


                                     For Appellant         : No appearance
                                     For Respondent 2      : Mr.R.Asokan
                                     For Respondent 1      : Not ready in notice




                                                        JUDGMENT

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ S.A. No.278 of 2006

The matter is listed under the caption “for dismissal” today. On the

last hearing date, i.e., on 15.07.2021, this Court recorded the submission

made by the learned counsel for the Appellant that she has given change of

vakalat three years back and therefore, directed the Registry to print the

name of the Appellant in the causelist and to post the matter for dismissal,

today. The Appellant has also not taken steps to serve notice on R1. Till

date no arrangements have been made by the Appellant either to appear by

himself or to engage a new counsel. It can now be inferred that the

Appellant is not interested in prosecuting this second appeal. Accordingly,

this second appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

20.07.2021 nl

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

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ S.A. No.278 of 2006

To

1. The Additional District and Sessions Court, (FTC-3), Chennai

2. The XVI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ S.A. No.278 of 2006

nl

S.A. No.278 of 2006

20.07.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/