Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 26517
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. SOUNTHAR, J
Subramani – Appellant
Versus
P.Duraisamy Palaniammal – Respondent
Second Appeal
Advocates:
For Appellant(s): Mr.S.Kaithamalai Kumaran
For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Navaneetha Krishnan for R1
For Appellant(s): Mr.S.Kaithamalai Kumaran
For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Navaneetha Krishnan for R1
Appeal abates upon appellant's death without timely substitution application.
Headnote:First Paragraph: The appeal arises under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code challenging judgments from lower courts in a property dispute. Essential facts involve the death of a party leading to abatement proceedings. The court recorded counsel's submission regarding a returned letter endorsed 'Died' and abated the appeal. Second Paragraph: The sole issue framed concerns abatement due to the appellant's death without substitution. The ratio decidendi holds that upon death notification, the appeal abates absent proper substitution application within limitation. Last Paragraph: Second Appeal stands dismissed as abated.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. counsel submits letter returned due to death. (Para 1) |
| 2. appeal dismissed as abated. (Para 2) |
JUDGMENT
The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the letter sent by him to the appellant was returned with an endorsement ‘Died’. The said submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is recorded.
2. Accordingly, the Second Appeal stands dismissed as abated. No costs.
