2007 (2) TMI 724

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ang and Rajiv Nanda, Advs For Respondents: Party-in-person through P.K. Aggarwal, Adv. JUDGMENT Arijit Pasayat, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court dismissing the First Appeal No. 681/2003 and upholding the order passed by learned Additional District Judge in Suit No. 54 of 2001. 3. Detailed ref....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l for the appellants submitted that the course adopted by the trial Court has no sanctity in law. The matter was listed on 13.5.2002 for plaintiff's evidence and was subsequently adjourned to 29.5.2002. Even if the defendants were not present the order could have been at the most to set the defendants ex parte and another date should have been fixed. Interestingly, the matter was taken up that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... proper to remit the matter to the trial Court for fresh adjudication. Since the matter is pending the trial Court shall dispose of the matter within three months from the date of receipt of our order. 6. It is also proper that the appellants should pay cost to the respondent. Even if the reason for non-appearance is accepted to be correct, the plaintiff was certainly prejudiced. Merely because....