IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 21ST MAGHA 1932 RSA.No. 206 of 2005(G) -------------------------------------- AS.218/2001 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, N.PARAVUR OS.48/1998 of ADDL.SUB COURT, N.PARAVUR .................... APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS 1 AND 2: 1. SRI.LAKSHMI ELECTROSMELTERS(P) LIMITED A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT `SWATHI COURTS', 112-B, KATTOOR STREET, COIMBATORE-641 037 REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.P.VENKITTAPATHY. 2. P.VENKITTAPATHY, S/O.PAPPU SWAMY NAIDU NO.24, 4th CROSS MEENA ESTATES, COIMBATORE-641 029, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT:4a, KAMALALAYA, RNP CO.OP. HOUSING COLONY, UPPLIPALAYAM POST, COIMBATORE-641 015. BY ADV. SRI.A.M.SHAFFIQUE, SR. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENTS AND PLAINTFS 3, 4 & 5: 1. V.PRABHAKAR, S/O.VARDHAN, 1958/82, 85th `E' BLOCK, 2nd STAGE, RAJAJI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 010. 2. K.VARDHAN, S/O.KRISHNA SWAMY, DO. DO. 3. V.VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O.K.VARDHAN, DO. DO. 4. V.BABU, S/O.K.VARDHAN, 1956/82, 85th `E' BLOCK, 2nd STAGE RAJAJI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 010. 5. G.SHANMUGHANATHAN, S/O.M.GNAN SAMBATHAN, LAKSHMI HOUSE, 7/B, PALAKKAD MAIN ROAD, KUNIAMUTHUR COIMBATORE-641 008. 6. UDAYASANKAR, S/O.CHELLIAH PILLAI NO.4, COTTON MILL ROAD, 1st STREET, P.N.ROAD, TIRIPUR-638 602. 7. V.MALLIKA, W/O.P.VENKITTAPATHY, NO.4, COTTON MILL ROAD 1ST STREET, P.N.ROAD TIRIPUR - 638 602 (PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 4A, KAMALALAYA, RNP CO.OP HOUSING COLONY, UPPLIPALAYAM POST, COIMBATORE - 641 015. ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR FOR R1,3 & 4 THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------------------- R.S.A.No.206 of 2005 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT As per order dated 21.12.2010, for the failure to take steps appeal was dismissed as against seventh respondent and declared as abated against second respondent. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that he had sent a registered notice to the parties seeking instructions and it was returned. Parties have promised to appear. As the suit stands dismissed as against some of the defendants and learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that in spite of notice parties have not turned up, appeal is dismissed for default. 10th February, 2011 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv