VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2023 › High Court of Madras

T.Raju v. N.Perumal & Thangaraj (Died)

DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
6 July 2023
Bench
P. Velmuruganauthor
Case no.
CMP 3968/2004

Judgment

CMP No.3968 & 3969 of 2004 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Sixth day of July Two Thousand and Twenty Three PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P.VELMURUGAN CMP No.3968 & 3969 of 2004 in SA NO. 1274 of 2002 T.RAJU ... PETITIONER/APPELLANT Vs N.PERUMAL THANGARAJ (DIED)

1.MOOKEN, 2 MACHAKKALAI 3 KATHAMMAL ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 4 THOTHAMMAL @ ALAGAMMAL 5 CHINNAPITCHAI 6 LAKSHMANAN 7 SEENI 8 VELLALTHAI 9 MINOR DHANASEKAR 10 MINOR PRIYA ...LRs OF DECEASED RESPONDENTS

(MINOR RESPONDENTS 11 & 12 ARE REPTD BY THEIR MOTHER & NATURAL GUARDIAN 10TH RESPONDENT) Petition filed praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court may be pleased to setaside the abatement of the above second appealdue to the demise of 2nd respondent Thangaraj CMP No.3968 & 3969 of 2004 PRAYER IN CMP NO. 3969 of 2004: Pleased to bring on record the respondents 3 to 7, Kathammal, Thothammal @ Alagammal, Chinnapitchai, Lakshmanan, seeni as L.R of late Perumal and Natchammal @ Vellaithai, Minor. Dhanasekar, Minor Piriya as L.R of Late Thangaraj as respondents 5 to 12 in the above apepal. PRAYER IN SA No. 1274 of 2002: Pleased to set aside the judgment and decree dated 29.06.2001 passed in A.S.No. 187 of 1997 on the file of Principal District Judge, Dindigul setting aside the judgment and decree dated

21.11.1997 passed in O.S.No. 795 of 1996 on the file of District Munsif Court, Dindigul and to decree the suit as prayed for. ORDER : This petition coming up for orders on this day, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of and the petitioner not appearing either in person or by an advocate for the petitioner, the court made the following order:- No representation for the petitioner.

2.This Court by order dated 15.06.2023 ordered fresh notice and private notice to the respondents and also directed the petitioner to pay batta within three days.

3.Today, when the matter taken up for hearing, no representation for the petitioner. The cause list shows that batta has not been paid. Therefore, these applications are dismissed for default. sd/- 06/07/2023 / TRUE COPY / /07/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. AM TO 1 THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE DINDIGUL. 2 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF DINDIGUL. CMPeNo.3968ee&e3969eofe2004 COPY TO THE SECTION OFFICER, JUDICIAL SECTION, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CMP No.3968 & 3969 of 2004 in SA NO. 1274 of 2002 Date :06/07/2023 PKP/ /SAR- /10.07.2023/ 3P/4C

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.