Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
Sri Dehnupureeswaraswami Koil – Appellant
Versus
M/s.Thiru Arooran Sugars Limited – Respondent
S.A(MD)No.557 OF 2009 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2009
Decided on : 04-07-2024
CIVIL PROCEDURE - SECOND APPEAL - The court dismissed the Second Appeal for default due to the appellant's lack of representation despite prior notice, emphasizing the importance of parties' presence in legal proceedings.
Fact of the Case:
The Second Appeal was filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against a judgment and decree from a lower court, which had reversed a previous decision.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant failed to appear for the hearing despite being served with an elevation memo, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for default.
Issues: Whether the absence of the appellant at the hearing warranted the dismissal of the Second Appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the absence of the appellant, despite notice, justified the dismissal of the appeal, reinforcing the necessity for parties to be present in court.
Result: The Second Appeal was dismissed for default, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.
JUDGMENT :
PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree made in A.S.No.141 of 2007, dated 15.10.2008, on the file of Additional Sub-Judge, Kumbakonam reversing the judgment and decree made in O.S.No. 20 of 2006, dated 30.07.2007, on the file of II Additional District Munsif, Kumbakonam.
When the Second Appeal came up for hearing on 02.07.2024, there was no representation for the appellant, inspite of the fact that elevation memo was served on appellant. Hence, in order to give an opportunity to the appellant, the Registry was directed to list the Second Appeal under the caption ‘’for dismissal’’ today. Today, the matter is listed under the caption ‘’for dismissal’’. Even today, there is no representation for the appellant.
2. Hence, the Second Appeal is dismissed for default. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
The dismissal of a Second Appeal for default underscores the requirement for parties to attend court proceedings and the consequences of failing to do so.
Failure to appear in court can lead to dismissal of appeals, underscoring the importance of active participation in legal proceedings.
The dismissal of a Second Appeal for default underscores the critical importance of a party's representation in legal proceedings and adherence to procedural norms.
The dismissal of appeals for default underscores the obligation of parties to appear and participate in legal proceedings, as failure to do so can result in the loss of their claims.
The dismissal of an appeal for default underscores the necessity of representation and active participation in legal proceedings.
The dismissal of an appeal for default underscores the necessity of active participation and adherence to procedural rules in civil proceedings.
A party may withdraw a Second Appeal, leading to its dismissal if the counsel formally indicates the intention not to pursue the case.
The dismissal of an appeal for default underscores the necessity for parties to be present and represented in court proceedings to avoid adverse outcomes.
A party may withdraw a Second Appeal if the underlying dispute has been resolved through settlement.
The court recognizes and upholds the validity of out-of-court settlements, allowing for the dismissal of appeals when parties reach a compromise.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
