VIDEOCON INTERNATIONAL LTD Vs. VIDEO LINKS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Counsel appearing for the parties. Rule. Shri Shriram S. Kulkarni waives notice for the respondents. As short question of law arises, Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent.

(2.) THIS revision application takes exception to the judgment and order dated 13th September, 2005 passed by the District Court Pune at Pune in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 196 of 2005. By the said decision the District Court allowed the appeal preferred by the respondents and passed the following order : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_425_MHLJ5_2006Html1.htm</FRM>

(3.) BRIEFLY stated, the applicant instituted suit against the respondents. The said suit was contested by the respondents by filing written statement. The respondents have also filed counter-claim in the said suit. Issues were also framed in the suit. The plaintiff filed evidence affidavit. As defendant and advocate were absent, Court passed no cross order and posted the suit for arguments. Even on the adjourned date the defendant and the Advocate were absent. The trial Court accordingly heard arguments of the Advocates for plaintiff and kept the matter for pronouncement of judgment. Accordingly, the trial Court by judgment and decree dated 13th July, 2004 decreed the suit in favour of the applicant. The operative part of the order passed by the trial Court on 13th July, 2004 reads thus : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_425_MHLJ5_2006Html2.htm</FRM>