SUNDERALINGAM Vs. K MANAI THUNAINATHA DESIKAR FT ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER

(2.) WE find no justification for adjourning the case any further. By a joint application the appellant V. Sunderalingam and the contesting respondent No. 1 K. Manaithunainatha have stated that they have entered into a compromise and the court may pass a decree in terms thereof. The dispute is about the right of management of trust property. Some of the property is in Sri Lanka and some in India. During .the course of the hearing of the appeal on 1/05/1984, it was pointed out that the compromise petition cannot be filed till respondents no6. 2 and 3, Who are residents of Jaffna in Sri Lanka, affirm the same. Apparently respondents nos. 2 and 3 support the appellant-plaintiff. With a view to complete the legal process, the appeal was adjourned to the first week of August 1984. Since then innumerable adjournments have been taken by learned counsel appearing for respondents nos. 2 and 3 on the ground that due to the disturbed situation in Jaffna , her clients were Unable to come to India to attend the hearing.