S.Venkateswaran vs S.Narayanasamy Pillai
2021 Latest Caselaw 12675 Mad

                                                                           S.A.(MD)No.1039 of 2006

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                DATED: 29.06.2021

                                                     CORAM:

                              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

                                             S.A.(MD)No.1039 of 2006
                                                       and
                                               M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2006

                   Lunatic S.Ramachandran

                   1.S.Venkateswaran
                   2.Lalitha Ammal                      ... Appellant/Appellant/Plaintiff

                                                     -Vs-


                   1.S.Narayanasamy Pillai
                   2.N.Chandran
                   3.N.Kuttimani
                   4.N.Kaliappan                   ... Respondents/Respondents/Defendants


                   PRAYER: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure
                   Code, against the Judgment and decree dated 24.05.2006 made in A.S.No.
                   194 of 2002 on the file of the Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court
                   No.4) Periyakulam, confirming the Judgment and decree dated 10.06.2002
                   made in O.S.No.89 of 1992 on the file of the Sub Court, Periyakulam.


                                     For Appellant          : Mr.R.Surianarayanan
                                       For R3               : Mrs.P.Jessi Jeeva Priya
                                     For R1, R2 & R4 : Dismissed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/


                   1/3
                                                                         S.A.(MD)No.1039 of 2006



                                                    JUDGMENT

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents had filed a memo

way back in 2014 that the appellant Ramachandran has passed away.

Of-course, the memo was not served on the counsel for the appellant. It is

now stated that R1, R2 and R4 have also passed away. The details of the

legal heirs of R1, R2 & R4 are not known to the learned counsel for the

appellant. In these circumstances, the second appeal has to be necessarily

dismissed as having abated. It is for the legal heirs of the appellant to take

appropriate steps to set aside the abatement. The second appeal is dismissed

as abated. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is

closed.

29.06.2021

Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No rmi

To

1.The Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.4) Periyakulam.

2.The Sub Court, Periyakulam..

3.The Section Officer, Vernacular Records, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

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

S.A.(MD)No.1039 of 2006

G.R.SWAMINATHAN.J.,

rmi

Judgment made in S.A.(MD)No.1039 of 2006 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2006

29.06.2021

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