Appellate court cannot decide an appeal on merits when the appellant is absent and unrepresented under Order 41 Rule 17(1).

The Supreme Court held that under Order 41 Rule 17(1) CPC, an appellate court may dismiss an appeal for default when the appellant is absent, but it cannot decide the appeal on merits in the appellant's absence. The Explanation was treated as barring merits adjudication without representation and preserving the appellant's ability to show sufficient cause for non-appearance. The High Court's disposal on merits was therefore unjustified, and the matter was restored for decision according to law.

---

---

Issues: Whether an appellate court can decide an appeal on merits when the appellant is absent and unrepresented, in view of the Explanation to Order 41 Rule 17(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Analysis: Order 41 Rule 17(1) permits dismissal of an appeal when the appellant does not appear, and the Explanation makes it clear that this power does not extend to dismissal on merits. The provision was inserted to prevent adjudication on merits in the appellant's absence and to preserve the opportunity to show sufficient cause for non-appearance. The earlier view that the appeal could be decided on merits without representation was not accepted.

Conclusion: The High Court was not justified in disposing of the appeal on merits in the absence of the appellant's representation. The impugned judgment was set aside and the appeal was restored for decision according to law.

Ratio Decidendi: When the appellant does not appear, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for default but cannot decide it on merits under Order 41 Rule 17(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

---