IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 29.01.2008 CORAM: The Honourable Mr.Justice S.TAMILVANAN A.S.No.356 of 1997 The Commissioner, H.R.& C.E. Admn.Department, Nungambakkam High Road, Madras – 34. ... Appellant/ Second Defendant -vs- 1.P.S.Sethurathinammal 2.Kausalya Ammal ... Respondents/Plaintiff,1st Defendant Appeal is filed under Section 70(2) of H.R.& C.E. Act 23 of 1959 against the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.50 of 1979 dated 17.04.1995 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Thiruvallur. For Appellant : Mr.R.Murugesan, Spl.Govt.Pleader (H.R.& C.E.) For 1st Respondent : Mr.T.L.Rammohan SC for Mrs.J.Anandavalli JUDGMENT This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.50 of 1979 dated 17.04.1995 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Thiruvallur. 2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant who was the second defendant in the suit. Mr.T.L.Ram Mohan, learned Senior counsel appearing for the first respondent drew the attention of this Court to the impugned judgment and decree wherein the Trial court has dismissed the suit as against the second defendant. According to the learned senior counsel when there is a dismissal of the suit in favour of the appellant/second defendant there would be no scope for him to prefer and maintain this appeal. Further, it is seen that the suit was filed for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction at Rs.5,198/- and therefore, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the appeal could have been filed before the District Court and not directly in the High Court. 3.In the aforesaid legal submissions made by the learned counsel for the first respondent, there is no legal defence from the appellant. It is clear that the second defendant after the dismissal of the suit against him is not entitled to prefer the appeal against the judgment and decree. Therefore, as contended by the learned counsel for the first respondent, this Court is of the view that without going into the merits of the case, the appeal itself is not legally maintainable. 4.In the result, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. However, there is no order as to costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar Smi To, 1. The Subordinate Judge, Tiruvallur. 2. The Record Keeper, VR Section, High Court, Madras. 1 cc to the Govt. Pleader, HR & CE SR.No.4449 1 cc to Mr.J. Anandhavalli, Advocate (SR.No.3799) JRG (CO) MMP 13.3.08 A.S.No.356 of 1997 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/