G.Varadrajan vs Madras Can Factory on 8 November, 2018

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Madras High Court

G.Varadrajan vs Madras Can Factory on 8 November, 2018

Bench: N.Seshasayee

                                                      1



                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                           Dated: 08.11.2018
                                                  CORAM:
                          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

                                           S.A.No.712 of 2008
                                                  and
                                            M.P.No.1 of 2008


                   G.Varadrajan
                   Proprietor,
                   Vijay Karthik Industries,
                   No.413, Anna Nagar West (E),
                   Chennai-600 101.                                      ...Appellant

                                                          Vs.


                   Madras Can Factory,
                   Rep. by C.R.Varalakshmi,
                   No.275, Ramakrishnapuram,
                   Villivakkam, Chennai – 600 049.                       ...Respondent


                   Prayer:- Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code

                   against the Judgment and Decree dated 28.7.2006 made in A.S.No.390

                   of 2005 on the file of the VI Additional City Civil Judge, at Chennai,

                   confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 22.12.2004 made in

                   O.S.No.11576 of 1996 on the file of the IV Assistant City Civil Judge,

                   Chennai.

                                     For Appellant        : Mr.A.Thayaparan

                                     For Respondent       : Mr.V.V.Krishnamoorthy
http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                              2



                                                     JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant died on 15.06.2018 and as he has not received any instructions from the legal representatives of the deceased appellant, it, therefore, must be considered that the appeal as abated.

2. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the respondent would intervene and submit that the appellant is a tenant of the respondent, and since during the pendency of the appeal, he had vacated and surrendered the vacant possession of the suit property to the respondent and nothing survives in this appeal.

3. Inasmuch as the appellants', the legal heirs are not before this Court to vouchsafe the statement of the learned counsel for the respondent, this Court chooses to dismiss the appeal as abated.

4. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed as abated. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

08.11.2018 ssn http://www.judis.nic.in 3 To

1.VI Additional City Civil Judge, Chennai.

2.IV Assistant City Civil Judge, Chennai.

http://www.judis.nic.in 4 N.SESHASAYEE.J., ssn S.A.No.712 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 08.11.2018 http://www.judis.nic.in

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court