AMARSINGH Vs. VIVEK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal under section 96 of CPC, the defendant No.1 has assai led the validity of the judgment dated 11.2.2013, passed by the trial Court in O.S.No.11/2011, by which suit for partition and separate possession filed by respondent No.1/plaintif f has been decreed.

(2.) When the matter is taken up today, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that defendant No.2, who was father of the defendant No.1 and grandfather of defendant No.3 was managing the affairs of the family and he was suffering from illness and old age and frequently he used to visit Pune and Mumbai and Bengaluru for treatment. It is further submitted that on account of circumstances beyond the control of the defendants, they could not file the written statement and defendant No.2 eventually expired on 9.12.2012 at the age of 90. It is also urged that the suit was decreed without any contest and the legal representatives of defendant No.2 were also not brought on record. It is further submitted that since valuable rights of the parties are involved and the party has a right to fair trial, the impugned judgment and decree may be set aside and the matter be remitted to the trial Court for decision afresh in accordance with law.

(3.) It is further undertaken by the learned counsel for the appellant that he shall file the written statement before the trial Court within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment and the trial Court be directed to decide the suit in a time bound manner.