Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17418 (MAD)

ARUMUGHAM PADAYACHI v. RAJAMANICKAM

SA/1474/2005 · 2025-01-30

T V Thamilselvi

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

S.A. Nos.1474 & 1475 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-01-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI SA NOS. 1474 & 1475 OF 2005 AND CMP NOS. 19205 & 19206 OF 2005 S.A.No.1474 of 2005 1. Arumugham Padayachi 2. Jayaraman 3. Kathalingam Appellants Vs 1. Rajamanickam 2. Pavadai Padayachi 3. Ranganathan Respondents Prayer:- Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 31.12.2004 made in A.S.No.127 of 2003 on the file of Addl. Sub-Court, Vridhachalam, reversing the judgment and decree dated 31.10.2003 made in O.S.No.63 of 1993 on the file of Addl. District Munsif Court-I, Vridhachalam. S.A No. 1475 of 2005 1. Jayaraman 2. Vellachi @ Rajathi Kathalingam (died) 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis S.A. Nos.1474 & 1475 of 2005 4. Govindharaj 5. Samidhurai 6. Balakrishnan 7. Kalamani (Appellants 4 to 7 brought on record as LRs. of deceased 3rd appellant vide order of court dated 13.08.2019 made in C.M.P. No.7212 to 7214 of 2018) Appellants Vs Rajamanickam Respondent Prayer:- Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 31.12.2004 made in A.S.No.128 of 2003 on the file of Addl. Sub-Court, Vridhachalam allowing the appeal against judgment and decree dated 31.10.2003 made in O.S.No.932 of 1992 on the file of Addl. District Munsif Court-I, Vridhachalam. For Appellants in both S.A.s : Mr.R.Sunil Kumar For 1st Respondent in S.A.No.1474 of 2005 : Mr.S.Saravanakumar No appearance – R2 & R3 For Respondent in S.A.No. 1475 of 2005 : Mr.S.Saravanakumar COMMON JUDGEMENT 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis S.A. Nos.1474 & 1475 of 2005 Today, when the matters taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel for 1st respondent appeared. The learned counsel for appellants submitted that first appellant died in the year 2022, but he is not able to get further instructions. 2. Considering the fact that the learned counsel for appellants reported 1st appellant died, these Second Appeals are liable to be dismissed as abated. Accordingly, these Second Appeals are dismissed as abated. No costs. Consequently, the connected Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 30.01.2025 rpp To Addl. Subordinate Judge, Vridhachalam. T.V.THAMILSELVI, J. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis S.A. Nos.1474 & 1475 of 2005 rpp S.A. Nos. 1474 & 1475 of 2005 30.01.2025 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis