Madras High Court
SA/953/2016 of ESUADIYAN Vs EPSIREETA on 3 November 2026
S.A. No.953 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.11.2026
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR
S.A. No.953 of 2016
Esuadiyan
… Appellant
Vs.
1. EpsiReeta
2. Stanley Roberts
... Respondents
Prayer: Second Appeal filed Under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 30.09.2016 passed in A.S.No.34 of 2010 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Kancheepuram, confirming the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.362 of 2008 dated 30.01.2010 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur.
For Appellant
:
No representation
For Respondents
:
Mr. S.S. Swaminathan
*****
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 05:34:26 pm )
S.A. No.953 of 2016
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
This Court, earlier on 30.10.2026, recorded the proceedings as follows: “ When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the respondents appeared and submitted that he had regularly appeared and is ready to argue the matter, whereas the appellant is dragging the issue. He further submitted that on one occasion, the matter was listed under the caption “for dismissal” and thereafter, after hearing the appellant in part, this Court removed the caption “for dismissal” and the matter is listed today. Even today also, the appellant has not appeared.
2. Considering the above submission, post the matter under the caption “for dismissal” on 03.11.2026.”
2. Accordingly the matter is listed today under the caption “For Dismissal”. Even today, there is no representation for the appellant. However, the learned counsel for respondents present. This shows that the appellant is not interested to proceed with this appeal, hence this Court is inclined to dismiss this second appeal for non-prosecution.
3. Accordingly, this Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. 03.11.2026 stn Index:Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 05:34:26 pm )
S.A. No.953 of 2016 To:
1. The Subordinate Judge, Kancheepuram.
2. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur.
3. The Section Officer, VR Section, Madras High Court, Chennai.
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 05:34:26 pm )
S.A. No.953 of 2016 K. RAJASEKAR, J. stn S.A. No.953 of 2016 03.11.2026
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 05:34:26 pm )