V. Karunakaran v. Sarathammal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15.11.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN A.S.No.778 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 1.V.Karunakaran 2.V.Karthekeyan ... Appellants Vs.

1.Sarathammal 2.Selvam 3.Sundararajan 4.Vimalchand 5.R.Balaji 6.Poongavanam 7.Gajendran 8.Velayudham 9.Akmal Batcha 10.Rajaram 11.Arunachalam 12.Kumar 13.Rani ... Respondents 1/4

PRAYER: Appeal Suit filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.11 of 2004 dated 28.12.2006 on the file of the District Judge, Tiruvannamalai. For Appellants : No Appearance For Respondents R1 & R2 : Mr.A.E.Kalaiselvan For R3 to R5 & R7 to R10 & R12 : No Appearance.

R6 : Left R11 & R13 : Unclaimed.

JUDGMENT

When the appeal suit came up for hearing on 13.04.2022, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that he has no instruction from the appellants. Hence, this Court, directed the Registry to issue notice to the appellants returnable by 28.04.2022. The draft notice sent to the appellants was served on 26.04.2022.

2.

Thereafter, When the matter was taken up for hearing on 08.11.2023, the names of the appellants were printed in the cause list but there was no representation on behalf of the appellants. Therefore, this Court, directed the Registry to list the matter on 15.11.2023 under the caption 'for dismissal'.

3.

Even today (15.11.2023), when the matter was called, 2/4

there is no representation on behalf of the appellants which is evident that the appellants have no interest in prosecuting the appeal. 4.

In view of the above, this Appeal suit is dismissed for default. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

15.11.2023 dpa Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking To 1.The District Judge, Tiruvannamalai.

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Madras. 3/4

G.ARUL MURUGAN .,J.

dpa A.S.No.778 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 15.11.2023 4/4