SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67440

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dr. A.D. Maria Clete, J
Duraiammal – Appellant
Versus
K.Lakshmi – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: No appearance
For the Respondents: Not ready in notice

J U DGMENT

When the matter was listed for hearing on 18.11.2025, there was no representation for the appellant, hence, Registry was directed to list the matter under the caption “for dismissal” on 19.11.2025 (i.e.,) today. When the matter is .called today there is no representation for the appellant and hence it is clear and evident that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the second appeal.

2. Hence, this second appeal is dismissed for non prosecution. No costs.

19.11.2025 Index : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order dpq To

1. The III Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.

2. The III Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.

3. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Madras Chennai.

D r.A.D. MARIA CLETE , J.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top