Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. SOUNTHAR, J.
Thangathaiammal – Appellant
Versus
Muniappan – Respondent
S.A. (MD) No. 512 of 2009, M.P. (MD) No. 1 of 2009
Decided On : 09-07-2024
ABATEMENT - SECOND APPEAL - The court dismissed the Second Appeal due to the abatement caused by the appellants' failure to pursue legal representation after the original parties expired, highlighting the importance of timely action in legal proceedings to avoid dismissal.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants filed a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against a judgment and decree from a lower court, but the counsel indicated that the letter sent to the appellants was returned marked 'Expired' and no legal representatives had approached to file a petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Second Appeal had abated due to the lack of action from the appellants' side to appoint legal representatives after the original parties had expired.
Issues: Whether the Second Appeal could proceed in the absence of legal representatives for the appellants after their expiration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the failure to file a Legal Representative Petition after the parties' expiration leads to abatement of the appeal, reinforcing the procedural requirement for representation in ongoing legal matters.
Result: The Second Appeal was dismissed as abated, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.
JUDGMENT :
S. SOUNTHAR, J.
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree made in A.S. No. 17 of 2008, dated 19.01.2009, on the file of Subordinate Judge, Sivakasi, confirming the judgment and decree made in O.S. No. 124 of 2002, dated 20.12.2007, on the file of District Munsif of Sivakasi.
1. The learned counsel for the appellants filed a memo, dated 08.07.2024 stating that the letter sent to the appellants returned with an endorsement “Expired” and their legal representatives have not approached him to file a Legal Representative Petition.
2. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed as abated. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
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 a Second Appeal for default underscores the critical importance of a party's representation in legal proceedings and adherence to procedural norms.
An appeal abates upon the death of the sole appellant if no legal representative is substituted.
A party may withdraw a Second Appeal if the underlying dispute has been resolved through settlement.
The dismissal of an appeal for default underscores the necessity of representation and active participation in legal proceedings.
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.
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.
Failure to appear in court can lead to dismissal of appeals, underscoring the importance of active participation in legal proceedings.
A Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code abates against deceased respondents, and if already dismissed against others, the appeal cannot be maintained.
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
