Mariyadas vs Retchanaganthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 23447 Mad

                                                                             S.A.No.761 of 2003


                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                     DATED : 30.11.2021

                                                         CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

                                                     S.A.No.761 of 2003

                     1. Mariyadas
                     2. Arokiadas
                     3. Selvaraj
                     4. Adaikalam                                             ... Appellants

                                                            -vs-
                     1. Retchanaganthan
                     2. George
                     3. Zavier
                     4. Moses
                                                                          .... Respondents

                     PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C, against the
                     Judgment and Decree dated 26.04.2001, made in A.S.No.13 of 2000, on the
                     file of the learned Sub Judge, Kumbakonam, confirming the Judgment and
                     Decree dated 13.12.1999 made in O.S.No.132 of 1997, on the file of the
                     District Munsif Court, Valangaiman at Kumbakonam.


                                   For Appellants      : No Appearance
                                   For Respondents     : Mr.K.Sekar



                     1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                       S.A.No.761 of 2003


                                                          JUDGMENT

When the Second Appeal was listed on 23.11.2021, there was no

representation on the side of the appellants and hence the Second Appeal

was directed to be posted today i.e., on 30.11.2021 under the caption “for

dismissal”. Even today, there is no representation on the side of the

appellants.

2. The learned counsel for the respondents submit that the suit is not

maintainable in view of the dictum laid down in the case of V.Rajendran

-Vs– The District Munsif, Thiruvaiyaru and others reported in 1996 2 LW

page 435.

3. Since there is no representation for the appellants, this Second

Appeal is dismissed for default. No costs.

                                                                                        30.11.2021

                     Index    : Yes / No
                     Internet : Yes / No
                     ebsi

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis S.A.No.761 of 2003

Note :

In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned.

To

1. The Sub Judge, Kumbakonam.

2. The District Munsif Court, Valangaiman at Kumbakonam.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis S.A.No.761 of 2003

R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

ebsi

S.A.No.761 of 2003

30.11.2021

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