G.Suguneswari vs M.Ramajeyam
2022 Latest Caselaw 572 Mad

                                                                               CMA.No.1007 of 2017

                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                      DATED : 10.01.2022

                                                               CORAM

                                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
                                              and
                       THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

                                                    CMA.No.1007 of 2017

                     G.Suguneswari                                              ... Appellant
                                                                 -vs-

                     M.Ramajeyam                                                ... Respondent

                                  Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family

                     Courts Act against the fair and decreetal order dated 26.08.2016

                     passed in HMOP.No.24/2014 by the learned Judge, Family Court,

                     Dharmapuri.


                                               For Appellant       : No appearance

                                               For Respondent      : Mr.M.R.Uma Vijayan

                                                          JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was pronounced by T.RAJA, J.)

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the fair

and decreetal order dated 26.08.2016 passed in HMOP.No.24/2014 by

the learned Judge, Family Court, Dharmapuri.

2. The matter was listed to-day under the caption, 'for

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA.No.1007 of 2017

dismissal' since there was no representation for the appellant before

this Court on the last hearing on 07.01.2022.

3. When the matter was called to-day, there was no

representation on behalf of the appellant. However,

Mr.S.C.Vishwanth, learned erstwhile Counsel stated that he had

already given change of vakalath to the appellant even in the year

2019 itself.

4. A perusal of the notes paper would go to show that there

was no representation on behalf of the appellant for the past two

years. Therefore, when the matter was listed even after a long gap

of two years, it is not known why the appellant-wife has not come

forward to proceed with the matter that shows that she is not

interested in prosecuting the matter. Therefore, the Civil

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

                                                                      (T.R.J.,)          (D.B.C.J.,)

                                                                                 10.01.2022

                     tsi

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA.No.1007 of 2017

To

The Judge, Family Court, Dharmapuri.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA.No.1007 of 2017

T.RAJA, J.

and D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

tsi

CMA.No.1007/2017

10.01.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA.No.1007 of 2017

16.12.2021

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