JUDGMENT:

The present appeal is preferred under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, by defendant Nos.3 and 5, who, of course, did not participate in the suit proceedings having remained ex parte, as only defendant No.2, who is respondent No.3 herein, contested the suit claim filed by respondent No.1, aggrieved over the judgment and decree, dated 07.02.1996, passed in O.S. No.1339 of 1989, by the learned II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

2. When the matter called, there was no representation for the appellants in the fore-noon sessions, and it was again called in the after-noon sessions, still, there is no representation. Sri A.K. Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.1 is present and heard his arguments.

3. Respondent Nos.2, 3, appellant Nos.1 and 2 and respondent No.4 are defendant Nos.1 to 5 respectively, in the aforesaid suit, while respondent No.1 is the plaintiff.

4. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as they were arrayed in the aforesaid suit.

5. The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs.61,943/-.

Defendant No.1 was a subscriber of chit in the plaintiff’s company of the value of Rs.1,00,000/- payable i