Madras High Court
SA/105/2016 of SELLAMMAL Vs VENKATESAN @ KUMARESAN on 10 November 2026
S.A. Nos.105 and 106 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.11.2026
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR
S.A. Nos.105 and 106 of 2016
and
C.M.P. No.2494 of 2016
S.A. No.105 of 2016
Sellammal
… Appellant
Vs.
1. Venkatesan @ Kumaresan
2. Jayalakshmi Ammal
3. Periyammal
4. Rajathi
5. Chandra
6. C. Subramani
7. Duraisamy
8. C. Senthilkumar
... Respondents
Prayer: Second Appeal filed Under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and Decree dated 10.04.2015 passed in A.S.No.7 of 2010 on the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Salem, modifying the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.930 of 2004 dated 30.09.2009 on the file of the learned I Additional District Munsif, Salem.
For Appellant
:
No representation
For RR 1 to 3
:
No appearance
For RR 4, 6 to 8
:
Exparte. NDW (vide Memo of Grounds)
For R5
:
Dismissed (vide Order dated 21.12.2022)
S.A. No.106 of 2016
S.A. Nos.105 and 106 of 2016
Sellammal
… Appellant
Vs.
1. Periyammal
2. Rajathi
3. Chandra
4. C. Subramani
5. Duraisamy
6. C. Senthilkumar
7. Venkatesan @ Kumaresan
8. Jayalakshmi Ammal
... Respondents
Prayer: Second Appeal filed Under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and Decree dated 10.04.2015 passed in A.S.No.13 of 2010 on the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Salem, modifying the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.930 of 2004 dated 30.09.2009 on the file of the learned I Additional District Munsif, Salem.
For Appellant
:
No representation
For RR 1, 7 and 8
:
No appearance
For RR 2, 4 to 6
:
Exparte. NDW (vide Memo of Grounds)
For R3
:
Dismissed (vide Order dated 21.12.2022)
*****
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.
COMMON JUDGMENT
This Court, earlier on 04.11.2026, recorded the proceedings as follows: “ When the matter was taken up for hearing today, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he has no instruction in this matter.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo today, indicating that in spite of taken best efforts, he was unable to get the instructions from his client and hence, vakalat filed on behalf of the appellant may be revoked.
3. The said memo is recorded.
4. The Registry is directed to list the matter on 05.11.2026
S.A. Nos.105 and 106 of 2016 (tomorrow) by printing the name of the parties in the cause list and remove the name of the learned counsel.”
2. Accordingly the matter was listed on 05.11.2026 and subsequently, the matter was adjourned today. Even today, there is no representation for the appellant in both appeals. This shows that the appellant is not interested to proceed with these appeals, hence this Court is inclined to dismiss these second appeals for non-prosecution.
3. Accordingly, these Second Appeals are dismissed for non- prosecution. Consequently, connected civil miscellaneous petition stands closed. No costs. 10.11.2026 stn Index:Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No K. RAJASEKAR, J. stn To:
S.A. Nos.105 and 106 of 2016
1. The Principal Subordinate Judge, Salem.
2. The I Additional District Munsif, Salem.
3. The Section Officer, VR Section, Madras High Court, Chennai. S.A. Nos.105 and 106 of 2016 and C.M.P. No.2494 of 2016 10.11.2026