1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE FIRST APPEAL NO.144 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3783 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.144 OF 2010 Ms Lipi @ Mrs. Laxmi Mukul Gupta Nee Miss Lakshmi P. Gupta .... Appellant Vs. Munish Bachchalal Gupta & Anr. .... Respondents Shri A.V. Chatuphale for the Appellant. S/Shri Prashant P. More i/b S.R. Mishra for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM: R.S. MOHITE, J. DATED: FEBRUARY 25, 2010 P.C: 1. Heard both sides. After having heard both sides, in my view, the matter can be disposed of finally at the admission stage. Hence, admit by consent of both the parties. Both the parties are heard finally. 2. It is seen that the impugned decree has been passed by the City Civil Court on 27-7-2009 in the absence of the defendant. The 2 roznama indicates that on 7-1-2009, the defendant was present and the affidavit of plaintiff No.1 was taken on the record. The matter was adjourned to 16-4-2009 when the defendant and her Advocate were absent. The matter was then adjourned to 16-6-2009, when again the defendant and her Advocate were absent. In the circumstances, the impugned judgment and decree was passed in the absence of the defendant on 30-9-2005 under Order 17, Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code. 3. It is seen from the affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant that the appellant lost her mother on 10-5-2009 at Kanpur, U.P.. 4. Taking into account all the above facts, in the interest of justice, I am inclined to set aside the impugned judgment and decree and to remand the matter so that the same can be decided afresh on merit from the stage of cross-examination of PW-1. 5. The interim order which was continuing during the pendency of the said suit will continue to operate during the pendency of the suit, after remand. Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the trial Court. 3 6. The Advocate for the appellant assures and undertakes to this Court that the appellant will remain present before the trial Court and will not delay the proceedings in any manner. It is expected that the trial Court decides the matter on or before 31-12-2010. The appeal accordingly stands disposed of with no order as to costs. 7. In view of the main appeal itself having been disposed off, the Civil Application No.3783 of 2009 does not survive and accordingly stands disposed of. R.S. MOHITE, J.