Kannaiyan vs Nagammal
2021 Latest Caselaw 12089 Mad

                                                                                S.A.No.1877 of 2003

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED: 21.06.2021

                                                         CORAM:

                                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                                  S.A.No.1877 of 2003
                                              and C.M.P.No.17013 of 2003

                     1.Kannaiyan
                     2.Duraisamy                                                     ...Appellants

                                                             vs.

                     Nagammal                                                       ...Respondent

                     Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the

                     Judgment and Decree dt.29.06.2001 made in A.S.No.52/2000 on the file

                     of the Court of the Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri,

                     reversing the Judgment and Decree made in O.S.No.446/1993 on the file

                     of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri.



                                   For Appellants        :     Mr.V.Kumaravelan

                                   For Respondents       :     Sole respondent – died – steps due




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                     1/2
                                                                               S.A.No.1877 of 2003

                                                                        ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

                                                                                             pam


                                                        JUDGMENT

The Appellants have not complied with the directions issued by

this Court on 23.04.2021 by taking steps to bring on record the legal

representatives of the deceased sole respondent.

2.Since steps have not been taken by the Appellant to bring on

record the legal representatives of the deceased sole respondent, the

Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

21.06.2021

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

S.A.No.1877 of 2003

To

1.The Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri.

2.The Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri.

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