G.Shanmugham v. Arulmighu Natesan Bajanai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09.11.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN S.A.Nos. 1634 and 1635 of 1992 and CMP No.16450 of 1992 in SA No.1634 of 1992 G.Shanmugham ...Appellant in both the Appeals Vs.

1 Arulmighu Natesan Bajanai Koil, Rep by its Trustee, Sankara Mudaliar.

2 Chinni Ramasamy Chetty Charities, fit person, Arulmighu Natesar Bajanai Koil, 26, Kanniga Parameswari Koil Street, Vellore.

...Respondents in both the Appeals

Prayer in SA 1634/92:- This Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 01.10.1992 and made in AS No.244 of 1990 on the file of Additional District Court, Vellore, confirming the judgment and decree dated 26.10.1990 made in OS. No.767 of 1978 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Vellore. Prayer in SA 1635/92:- This Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 01.10.1992 and made in AS No.245 of 1990 on the file of Additional District Court, Vellore, confirming the judgment and decree dated 26.10.1990 made in OS. No.530 of 1981 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Vellore. For Appellant : No Appearance For Respondents: No Appearance COMMON ORDER These two Appeals have been preferred by the tenant under the first respondent, who is the plaintiff in the suits for https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

eviction and recovery of rent. Having lost the case before both the Courts below and suffering the order of eviction, and recovery of rental arrears the tenant has preferred these Appeals in the year 1992. These Appeals have been posted earlier on several occasions including under the caption for dismissal, there was no representation for the appellant either through counsel or in person, therefore in the previous hearing this Court directed the Registry to print the name of appellant and post the case for hearing. Even today, when the cases were listed showing the name of the appellant, there is no representation.

2. Hence, the Second Appeals are dismissed for nonprosecution. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS VII ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar jv To 1 The Additional District Judge, Vellore.

2 The Principal District Munsif, Vellore.

3. The Section Officer VR Section, High Court, Madras S.A.Nos. 1634 and 1635 of 1992 KSJ (CO) kk 1/12 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/