VENKATALAKSHMAMMA Vs. RAMESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have questioned the legality and correctness of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.4783/1998 dated 8.4.2010 by the I Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, wherein the Court below has granted decree in favour of the 1st respondent who was the plaintiff in the suit, a share in the properties claimed by the 1st appellant viz. suit item Nos.2 and 4 to 7 and to the 2nd appellant who was defendant No.4, a share in the suit item No.13.

(2.) THE matter was heard in part. When the matter was heard in part, the respondents' counsel was present. Subsequently, the case was being adjourned from time to time on account of the absence of the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Since the respondents' counsel is continuously absent inspite of the fact that the appeal is a part -heard, we have no other option than to dispose of the case on merits in accordance with law. In the circumstances, without the assistance of the respondents' counsel, this appeal is disposed of.

(3.) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred to as per their status before the Trial Court.