S.A.Nos.376, 377 & 378 of 2000 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J. The 2nd respondent in S.A.No.377 of 2000 had unfortunately died and steps have been taken and legal representatives have been impleaded as R4, R5, R6 and R7. 2. Notice had been directed and an affidavit of service has been filed, which indicates that R4, R5 and R6 had left India and R7 refused to receive the notice. 3.The Registry may therefore print the names of R4, R5, R6 and R7 in the cause list, for the hearing date 29.06.2022. 4.The first respondent is represented by counsel. 5.Ms.N.S.A.Nilaphar, Advocate, No.11, 2nd Street, Jagadambal Colony, Royapettah, Chennai – 14, Mobile No.9962093995 / 9176080531, is appointed as an amicus on behalf of the legal representatives of R2 namely, R4 to R7. 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.V.KARTHIKEYAN.,J smv 6.The learned counsel for the appellant may serve the relevant records on the amicus and advance arguments on 29.06.2022. 7.Insofar as R3 is concerned notice issued had been returned as R3 died. But it is seen from the records that R3 was set exparte in the suit and therefore, the necessity in bringing on record the legal representatives would not arise. 8.The Registry may however record in the cause title that R3 died and also note that R3 was set exparte in the suit. 9.Call the matter once again on 29.06.2022. 22.06.2022 smv S.A.Nos.376, 377 & 378 of 2000 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis