AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr. Shringarpure, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents waives service. He, however, seeks adjournment to take instruction. Going through the order and considering the fact that the refusal to adjourn the appeal by a mere one day from 14-9-1987 to 15-9-1987, which is the only grievance made by the petitioner''s Counsel before me, I am not inclined to adjourn the petition.
One is at this stage not concerned with the merits of the dispute between the parties. What stares one in the face is the rather adamant refusal of the Appellate Authority to adjourn the matter by mere 24 hours to accommodate the Advocate who had certain difficulty on the previous day because of a matter in the Supreme Court. Interest of justice would not have suffered if the hearing of the appeal had been adjourned by mere one day as prayed for by the Advocate.
In the result, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 8-12-1987 at Exh. ''C'' is set aside. The appeal proceedings are sent back to the Appellate Authority which shall now hear the said appeal afresh on merits and in accordance with law after notice to the appellants and after hearing them in the matter.
Rule is made absolute in terms aforesaid but, in the circumstances, with no order as to costs.