Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 9498 Mad
Judgement Date : 2 August, 2023
S.A.No.1742 of 2003
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 02.08.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
S.A.No.1742 of 2003
1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep.
by the District Collector,
Kanyakumari District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Vilavancode Taluk,
Kuzhithurai.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Pakode Village, Vilavancode Taluk,
Kanniyakumari District.
... Appellants
-vs-
1.Thangayyan
2.Chellan
3.Kesavan Nadar
4.Administrative Officer
Pacade Town Panchayat.
... Respondents
PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 Code of Civil
Procedure against the Judgment and Decree dated 23.06.1994 made in
A.S.No.27 of 1993 on the file of the Sub Judge, Kuzhithurai reversing
the Judgment and Decree dated 22.04.1993 made in O.S.No.282 of 1984
on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Kuzhithurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
S.A.No.1742 of 2003
For Appellants ... Mr.A.Baskaran
Addl. Govt. Pleader
For Respondents ... Mr.P.Thiayarajan for R1
JUDGMENT
The first respondent/plaintiff has filed the suit in O.S.No.282 of
1984, on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Kuzhithurai for
damages and for injunction against the appellants and the respondents 2
to 4 herein. The trial Court, after trial, dismissed the suit. Challenging
the said Judgment and Decree passed by the trial Court, the first
respondent/plaintiff has filed the appeal in A.S.No.27 of 1993, on the file
of the Sub-Court, Kuzhithurai. The first appellate Court, after hearing
the appeal, allowed the appeal and decreed the suit. Challenging the
Judgment and Decree passed by the first appellate Court, the
appellants/defendants 1 to 3 have filed the present second appeal before
this Court.
2.When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned
counsel for the first respondent/plaintiff would submit that the first
respondent/plaintiff passed away as early as on 18.11.2018. He has also
filed a memo to that effect.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.No.1742 of 2003
3. In this case, the first respondent/plaintiff alone is the necessary
party. Insofar as the respondents 2 and 3, this second appeal has already
been dismissed for default on 02.03.2022. The fourth respondent is the
formal party. Hence, without impleading the legal heirs of the deceased
first respondent/plaintiff, no order can be passed. Therefore, since no
steps have been taken by the appellants in respect of the first
respondent/plaintiff, this Second Appeal is dismissed as abated. No
costs.
02.08.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes skn
To:
1.The Sub Judge, Kuzhithurai.
2.The Additional District Munsif, Kuzhithurai.
3.The Section Officer, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.No.1742 of 2003
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
skn
S.A.No.1742 of 2003
02.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!