Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2002 DAILYLAW 1686 (MAD)

ANTONINETTE ALEXIS, v. AROKIAM LOUIS MARIE JOSEPH,

AS/71/2002 · 2026-07-13

M Jothiraman, N Sathish Kumar

Transfer Petitionbody2002

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

AS No. 71 of 2002 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN AS No. 71 of 2002 and CMP Nos. 10433 of 2002 and 10693 of 2004 1. Antoninette Alexis, D/o.Alexis Sandanasamy 2. Marie Josephine Alexis, Rep.By Power Agent Paulraj 3. Philomina Alexis ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. Arokiam Louis Marie Joseph (Died) S/o.Late Arokiyanathan 2. Marie Joseph Aime 3. Anna Marie, Pondicherry 4. Alexis Raja 5. Alexis Bosco, 6. Alexis Bruno, 7. Alexis Jagan https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis AS No. 71 of 2002 __________ Page2 of 4 8. Aroquiame Irudayamary 9. Aroquiame Sagaya Andoniraj 10. Aroquiame Conjandenadin 11. Aroquiame Daniel 12. Aroquiame Amalor Julien ..Respondent(s) [R8 to R12 brought on record as LRs of deceased first respondent vide order of Court dated 28.03.2007 made in C.M.P.Nos.8133 and 8134 of 2005] For Appellant(s): Mr.N.C.Ramesh For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Vidhuthalai Senior counsel for Ms.R.Revathy for R2 Mr.R.Sunil Kumar for R8 to R12 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.Sathish Kumar J.) This appeal has been filed against the final decree proceedings and is pending from the year 2002. 2. Today, a memo on behalf of the second appellant had been filed by the learned counsel for the appellants seeking permission to withdraw the appeal. It is also stated in the memo that the first appellant died on 25.07.2014 and the third appellant died on 14.07.2013. Though second appellant is the sister of the other appellants, she has not made any attempt to implead the legal https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis AS No. 71 of 2002 __________ Page3 of 4 representatives of the 1st and 3rd appellants. For more than twenty years, their death have not even been informed to the Court and their legal representatives have also not come on record. 3. In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed as abated as against Appellants 1 and 3 and the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn as against second appellant. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (N.S.K.,J.) (M.J.R.,J.) 13-07-2026 gpa https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis AS No. 71 of 2002 __________ Page4 of 4 N.SATHISH KUMAR J. AND M.JOTHIRAMAN J. gpa AS No. 71 of 2002 and CMP Nos. 10433 of 2002 and 10693 of 2004 13-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis