Madras High CourtREV.APLC(MD)/58/2022dismissed for nonprosecution

Dasan (Died) 2. Kunju (Died) 3. K.B. Pushparaj v. Kurusumuthunadar (Died) 2.P.Satyam (Died) 3.C.Devi(Died) 4.Aruldass(Died) 5.Lara(Died) 6.J.Jeevaraj

2024-07-04Honourable Mr Justice N. Sathish Kumar5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :

Coram THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR REVIEW APPLICATION (MD) No.58 of 2022 in C.M.P.(MD) No.4105 of 2018 in S.A.No.404 of 1997 1.Dasan (Died) 2.Kunju (Died) 3.K.B.Pushparaj 4.P.C.Jain ..... Applicants -Versus1. Kurusumuthu Nadar (Died)

2. P.Satyam (Died)

3. C.Devi (Died)

4. Aruldass (Died)

5. Lara (Died)

6. J.Jeevaraj

7. J.Jayaseelan

8. S.Easak

9. S.Kamalabai

10. S.Thomson (Died) 11.M.Lazer 12.N.Gregori

13.M.Sathyaraj [Minor Rep. By Mother N.Gregori,12th respondent] 14.Sundari (Died) 15.K.Antoni 16.K.Sali Aruliah 17.Saral (Died) 18.A.Abraham (Died) 19.P.Yovan 20.George Nessaya 21.Mary Ramani 22.John Devakumar (Died) 23.John Jayakumar 24.John Vedaraj (Died) 25.A.Anbaiya 26.M.S.Arulayya 27.M.I.Kesari 28.Chelliachi 29.S.Davidson 30.S.Jayasingh Bright 31.Lilly 32.Royappan 33.Maria Mayel 34.Gabriel (Died) 35.Varghese 36.Jessi 37.Stanley 38.Robinson

39.Edison ..... Respondents Review Application filed under Order XLVII, Rule 1 read with Section 114 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying to review the order of this court dated 22.01.2021 made in C.M.P.(MD) No.4105 of 2018. For Applicant(s) : Mr.Punitha Devakumar (No Appearance for Applicants 3 and 4) Applicants 1 and 2 Died For Respondent (s) : No appearance for RR 6, 8, 11, 16, 19, 21, 23, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32, 33 and 35 No appearance for R13 (minor) rep. by R12 RR7 & 9 Notice returned as addressees not known RR30 - Notice refused RR20, 36 to 39 Notice returned as Addressees left RR1 to 5, 10, 14, 17, 18, 22, 24 and 34 Died

ORDER

When this review application is taken up today for hearing, there is no representation for the review applicants 3 & 4. On 05.04.2024 also when the matter came up for hearing, there was no representation on behalf of the applicants 3 & 4. Thus, it appears that the applicants 3 and 4 are not interested in prosecuting the matter further. Hence, this review application is dismissed

for non prosecution. No costs.

Index : yes / no : yes / no Speaking / Non Speaking Order kmk

N.SATHISH KUMAR.J., kmk REVIEW APPLICATION (MD) No.58 of 2022 in C.M.P.(MD) No.4105 of 2018 in S.A.No.404 of 1997