SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1953 Supreme(Raj) 191

DAVE, WANCHOO
Moolraj – Appellant
Versus
Narsingh Das – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Balkrishan Acharya & Badri Narayan, for Appellants; Hastimal, for Respondent

Wanchoo, C.J.—This is an appeal by Moolraj and others, who were plaintiffs, against dismissal of their suit by the Civil Judge of Jodhpur.

2. The history of the case may be narrated in order to understand the point involved. The suit was filed in April, 1951, and was based on a promissory-note. The written Statement by the defendant respondent was filed on the 8th of February. 1952. Thereafter 17th of April was fixed for replication and framing of issues. Issues were framed on that date and the case was then fixed for hearing on the 11th of August, 1952. On that date the plaintiffs were absent. One Mr. Ranchor Das appeared on their behalf and presented an application for adjournment on the ground that Moolraj, one of the plaintiffs, was seriously ill and the other two plaintiffs who were his sons could not come in view of his serious condition. The application was considered by the court and it pointed out that the counsel was not authorised to make that application as he did not hold a vakalat-nama from the plaintiffs. The court further held that sufficient cause was not shown why the plaintiffs had not summoned evidence. It, therefore, dismissed the application for adjournment and

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top