KUMBLE ACHUTRAO RAMRAO Vs. SHANTILAL PRANJIVANDAS DALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendant appeal against a decree passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Bombay in Suit No. 4509 of 1966 on 22-1-1982. The suit was filed in 1966 and issues were framed in 1981. Suit came up for hearing on 22-1-1982. The suit was called out in the morning session but since the defendant and his advocate were absent it was postpone to the afternoon session. Again it was called out in the afternoon session at 4. 15 p. m. and that time plaintiff and his advocate were present and defendant and his advocate were absent. The suit being of 1966 and issues were framed and settled in July, 1981 in the presence of both the advocates, and the suit was adjourned from time to time. The learned trial Judge did not think it just and proper to adjourn the suit when the defendant and his advocate were absent. After recording the evidence of the plaintiff and perusing the document and correspondence tendered by the plaintiff in the Court and after hearing the advocate of the plaintiff, the learned trial Judge passed the impugned decree.

(2.) IN this Court, Shri V. A. Thorat represented the appellant (original defendant ). The original appellant as well as respondent have, died during pendency of the appeal, and therefore, their heirs have been brought on record. However, none appeared for the respondents even after the service.

(3.) THE plaintiffs case, in brief, is as under:-That the agreement dated 5th July 1961 executed by the defendant has come to an end on 10th July 1966 and on this basis the plaintiff had filed a suit against the defendant for an order and decree that the defendant, his servants and agent be ordered and decreed to remove themselves from the suit premises of Shantilal and Bros, together with his belongings and to return to the plaintiff all the furniture and fixtures as mentioned in the agreement Exhibit A to the plaint and thereby to deliver vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises to the plaintiff.