Kerala High Court
Leela vs Vasu on 28 February, 2003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2015/10TH ASHADHA, 1937
RSA.No.503 of 2003 (B)
--------------------------
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN AS 73/1999 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT,
NORTH PARAVUR DATED 28-02-2003
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OS 287/1988 of MUNSIFF COURT, ALUVA
DATED 20-06-1998
SECOND APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFF:
----------------------------------------------------
1. LEELA, W/O. SREEDHARAN, PAINUNGAL,
RESIDING AT PALISSERIYIL KARUKUTTY KARA,
KOTHAKULANGARA NORTH VILLAGE.
2. BIJU, S/O. SREEDHARAN,
PAINUNGAL, RESIDING AT PALISSERIYIL KARUKUTTY KARA,
KOTHAKULANGARA NORTH VILLAGE.
3. BINESH, S/O. SREEDHARAN, PAINUNGAL,
RESIDING AT PALISSERIYIL KARUKUTTY KARA,
KOTHAKULANGARA NORTH VILLAGE.
BY SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SENIOR ADVOCATE)
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:
---------------------------------------------------
1. VASU, S/O. KRISHNAN, PAINUNGAL,
RESIDING AT PALISSERIYIL KARUKUTTY KARA,
KOTHAKULANGARA NORTH VILLAGE.
2. SALIM BABU, S/O. PADMANABHAN,
ARAKKAL, RESIDING AT PALISSERIYIL KARUKUTTY KARA,
KOTHAKULANGARA NORTH VILLAGE.
3. JANAKI, W/O. LATE KRISHNAN, PAINUNGAL,
RESIDING AT PALISSERIYIL KARUKUTTY KARA,
KOTHAKULANGARA NORTH VILLAGE.
RSA.No.503 of 2003 (B)
4. CHANDRAN, S/O. LATE KRISHNAN,
PAINUNGAL, RESIDING AT PALISSERIYIL KARUKUTTY KARA,
KOTHAKULANGARA NORTH VILLAGE.
5. SARADA, D/O. LATE KRISHNAN, PAINUNGAL,
RESIDING AT PALISSERIYIL KARUKUTTY KARA,
KOTHAKULANGARA NORTH VILLAGE.
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
01-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
No representation. Dismissed for default.
Sd/-
01.07.2015 P. Bhavadasan, Judge.
// True Copy // P.A. to Judge.
smp K. HARILAL, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.S.A.No. 503 of 2003
- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 21st day of October, 2016 J U D G M E N T Though, the case stands for disposal, when the case is called, there is no representation for the appellant. It could be presumed that the appellant is not interested to prosecute the matter. Hence, this Regular Second Appeal will stand dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/-
K. HARILAL, JUDGE DST //True copy// P.A. To Judge