MURLIDHAR SITARAM Vs. VITHAL DAJIBA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The suit out of which this application for revision arises was filed by the plaintiff non-applicant against three defendants the first of whom alone has filed the present application for revision, without joining the other two defendants even as non-applicants. The. relevant facts are these: On 9th September 1932 the Court, which was then presided over by Mr. Sitaram Mudaliyar, passed the following order dismissing the suit: Plaintiff by Mr. Dani. Defendants by Mr. Pendke.

(2.) MR . Dani for plaintiff files a W. Reply and an application for amendment of the plaint by putting up an alternative case. Further pleadings are required from the plaintiff to make definite his position in the W. Reply and in the application for amendment. Mr. Dani says that he has no instructions at all on any of those points nor indeed on any point in the case. His statement taken. He says that ho was engaged only to file the W. Reply and application for amendment, which the plaintiff brought from Wardha and that he has been expressly asked by him not to make any statement if a need for it arose and to ask for adjournment.

(3.) UNDER those circumstances as the plaintiff has made no arrangements for his proper representation and for the proper conduct of the suit, I hold he is absent. The defendants have denied the claim of the plaintiff. I dismiss the suit in default of the plaintiff. Costs of defendant to be paid by plaintiff.