M. Chockalingam, J.

1. Challenge is made to the judgment of the learned Single Judge made in C.S.No.633 of 1989, whereby a decree was granted in favour of the plaintiff and as against the defendants. Aggrieved the second defendant has brought forth this appeal before this Court.

2. Despite service of notice, the respondents/plaintiffs have not appeared before this court. Hence the Court heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also looked into the materials available and made the judgment as follows:

3. The short facts with which the respondents/plaintiffs approached this court, as could be seen in the plaint in C.S.No.633 of 1989, are it was a suit for recovery of money of Rs.10,93,078.48 together with interest and costs. There was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant for supply of Heat Exchangers and as per the purchase order, dated 112. 1985, the same was supplied and there was delay in making supply. As per the understanding, 6 Heat Exchangers, 5 Evaporators and 5 Separators were supplied and part payment for the supply of 6 Heat Exchangers was made and the balance in respect of the supply of the 7th Heat Exchanger remained unpaid and in resp