RAMESH JAGANNATH INGOLE Vs. SHAKUNBAI GANESH INGOLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit. The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration in this appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code):

(2.) The appellant is the original plaintiff who had filed Regular Civil Suit No. 1622 of 2003 for declaration and perpetual injunction. According to original plaintiff he was the owner of the suit property and the defendant was obstructing his possession. The respondent-original defendant contested said suit and by judgment dated 08.10.2007 the trial Court decreed the suit holding that the defendant had no right to either encroach upon the suit property or obstruct the plaintiff's possession.

(3.) The respondent being aggrieved by the aforesaid decree had filed appeal under Section 96 of the Code. The first appellate Court thereafter issued notice of the appeal to the present appellant. As said notice was not duly served upon the present appellant, the respondent sought permission to serve the appellant by way of substituted service. The first appellate Court granted such permission and notice of the appeal was thereafter published in newspaper "Tarun-Bharat". As the appellant did not appear even thereafter, the first appellate Court after hearing the original defendant allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit.