THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.C.C.A. No.266 of 2004 and C.R.P.No.581 of 2004 COMMON ORDER: (Per BPR,J) Heard both sides. Since the appeal and the revision arise from common questions, they are taken up together for disposal. The appellants/petitioners are the defendants, who are aggrieved by the orders passed at the stage of final decree proceedings, determining the quantum of goodwill to which the parties would be entitled to in terms of the decree in O.S.No.1013 of 1984. There is no dispute in regard to the chequered events. The suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff for dissolution of suit firm; for settlement of accounts till such dissolution and for payment of her share. A preliminary decree was passed on 26.06.1989. The matter was carried to this Court in C.C.C.A.No.3 of 1990, which was disposed of, by order 08.08.1996, giving a direction to the effect that the accounts shall be duly settled in a separate application in the final decree proceedings and that the plaintiff shall be entitled to project her claim with regard to goodwill. Accordingly, the matter was taken up by the Court below. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed and he submitted report. Thereafter, certain quantum had been determined by the Court below, by orders dated 14.06.2004 in I.A.No.1436 of 1989 in O.S.No.1013 of 1984, and dated 27.10.2003 in I.A.No.606 of 2003 in I.A.No.1436 of 1989 in O.S.No.1013 of 1984. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants/petitioners are before this Court, by filing C.C.C.A.No.266 of 2004 against the order dated 14.06.2004 in I.A.No.1436 of 1989 in O.S.No.1013 of 1984 passed by the First Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, and C.R.P.No.581 of 2004 against the order dated 27.10.2003 in I.A.No.606 of 2003 in I.A.No.1436 of 1989 in O.S.No.1013 of 1984 passed by the very same Court. The main ground urged before this Court is that having regard to the nature of the claim, it needs to be ascertained and quantum has to be determined, after holding an enquiry and giving opportunity to both sides to lead evidence. There is no such enquiry and no evidence is available on record. Therefore, the determination arrived at by the Court below is unsustainable. There is no serious dispute by the learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff about the absence of enquiry and availability of the material and evidence into the claims of either side. In view of the aforesaid reason, shorn of all the details of the matters, it would suffice in the interests of justice to direct the Court below to conduct enquiry and give opportunity to both the parties, for determination of quantum of goodwill and the entitlement thereof. Accordingly, the appeal and the revision are allowed and the impugned orders dated 14.06.2004 passed in I.A.No.1436 of 1989 in O.S.No.1013 of 1984 by the First Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, and dated 27.10.2003 passed in I.A.No.606 of 2003 in I.A.No.1436 of 1989 in O.S.No.1013 of 1984 by the First Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, are hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to the Court below for fresh disposal of the same, after conducting enquiry and giving opportunity to both sides to let in evidence, in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J _______________ R. KANTHA RAO, J 18th June, 2010 GHN