BABAN HARI TIKONE Vs. MAHADEO JAMNALAL AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is being disposed off at the stage of admission itself. As substantial question of law is involved in respect of proper construction of Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended to be considered by this Court, Appeal stands admitted. Learned advocate for Respondents waives service. By consent appeal made returnable forthwith. Printing of paperbooks so also the record and proceedings of the lower Court dispensed with. By consent appeal taken up for hearing.

(2.) IT is unnecessary to burden the judgment with the facts in the matter suffice it however to state that the appellant herein is the original defendant No.2, a contestant-defendant. Respondent No.1 is the original plaintiff. Respondent No.2 is the mother of defendant No.2.

(3.) THEREAFTER the plaintiff moved application for amendment of the plaint. The amendment related to seeking of possession of the disputed property in the suit. It appears that the process of the amendment was served upon the advocate of applicant No.2 on record. No reply was filed therefor and eventually the amendment came to be granted. It is noticed that after grant of amendment no further process as and by way of amended writ of summons was served upon the 2nd defendant. The 2nd defendant also did not file his written statement in response to the original writ of summons or even after the amendment. Matter proceeded ex-parte and decree came to be passed in favour of the plaintiff.