1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.1588 OF 1988 The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay .. Plaintiff Versus Air Coils Manufacturing Co. Pvt.Ltd. .. Defendant Ms.V.S.Bhalekar i/b. Mulla & Mulla for plaintiff None for defendants. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 7th January 2009 P.C. . In this suit the defendants are duly served. They had entered appearance through their Advocate and filed their written statement. However, despite liberty being given to them on 30th August 2008 to appear at the stage of framing issues, they have not appeared. The written statement being on record, this Court 2 framed necessary issues. Issue Nos. 1 to 5 completely cast the burden on defendants to prove them, but they have failed to discharge the same. 2. To prove the claim, plaintiffs have filed their documents and affidavit of evidence. All that the plaintiffs are obliged to prove is whether they are entitled to recover wharfage, demurrage and other charges from the defendants in the sum set out in the plaint. To prove the claim in the suit, the plaintiffs have filed the affidavit in lieu of examination in chief of their witness, Santosh Dighe, Assistant Docks Manager and Authorised Signatory. He confirms the signature below the affidavit. He has also produced the letter of authority from Port Trust to depose on their behalf. He has stated that the affidavit is drafted as per the instructions and he confirms each of the statements made therein. The affidavit in lieu of examination in chief is taken on record. 3 3. None appears for the defendants to cross examine the plaintiffs’ witness, although the matter is listed under caption "for recording evidence". Enough opportunity has been given to the defendants to appear and contest the suit after the written statement was filed by them and issues were framed. However, they have remained absent as is evidenced from the Roznama. 4. The witness has confirmed the plaint averments and allegations. He has also deposed with regard to the contents of the documents which have been produced from the custody and records of Port Trust and which have been maintained in the ordinary course of their business. The documents evidence the transaction and thus liability is proved. There is no cross examination with regard to the statements made on affidavit in lieu of examination in chief and contents of the documents. In such circumstances 4 and when the affidavit of documents was duly forwarded to the defendants, the same can be accepted. Compilation of documents with list is taken on record and documents are exhibited and marked as Exh.P-1 to 27. 5. In the light of the fact that there is no cross examination as observed above, Issue Nos.6 and 7 are answered in favour of the plaintiffs and against defendants. The suit claim stands decreed. However, further interest i.e. from the date of filing of the suit till decree shall be at 15% p.a. and from the date of decree till payment and/or realisation the same shall be computed at 6% p.a. Refund and Advocates fees as per rules. C.C. expedited. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)