Shahitha Barveen, v. Shahul Hameed,

JUDGMENT The sole respondent has died long before. Since the appellants have not taken effective steps to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased sole respondent and they have filed a petition to condone the huge delay of 1916 days without giving appropriate reasons for the delay, this Court dismissed the condone delay petition and the consequential petitions.

¶2In view of the above, the appeal cannot survive without any respondent. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed as abated. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

12.07.2023 (2/2) NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order mbi To

1.The Sub Judge, Uthamapalayam.

2.The District Munsif, Uthamapalayam.

3.The Section Officer, Vernacular Records Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. P.VELMURUGAN

, J.

mbi

12.07.2023 (2/2)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.07.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN S.A(MD)No.175 of 2014 & M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014 1.Shahitha Barveen 2.A.Hithayathullah ...Appellants vs. Shahul Hameed ... Respondent Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and Decree dated 18.09.2013 in A.S.No. 14 of 2013 on the file of the Sub Court, Uthamapalayam confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 28.02.2013 in O.S.No.49 of 2011 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Uthamapalayam. For Appellants : Mr.T.Lajapathiroy For Respondent : Mr.K.Badurus Zaman