Valliammai Achi vs Maranen Pillai

We think that owing to the defendant''s absence at the original hearing, the plaintiff did not present all his evidence but only evidence sufficient to satisfy the District Munsif. The plaintiff could, no doubt, have adduced further evidence on the order of remand by the District Judge, but the defendant who obtained the remand did not adduce any evidence at all and the plaintiff remained content with the evidence which had satisfied the District Munsif. In these circumstances, we think, that the District Judge should not have deprived the plaintiff of his decree without giving him an opportunity of putting on the record the additional evidence which he had filed in Court from the first, and only abstained from tendering in the circumstances stated above. We accordingly reverse the decree and remand the case to the District Judge for disposal according to law after both parties have had an opportunity of adducing their evidence. The appellant will pay the respondent costs in this Court as the result is partly due to his own laches. Other costs will be provided for in the decree.