DEBANGSU BASAK, J. - (1.) THE suit was for recovery of price of goods sold and delivered. The original Defendant No. 1 was a registered partnership firm of which the Defendant Nos. 2 and 3 were its partners. The Defendant No. 1 was registered by under the Calcutta Tea Trading Association. The composition of the Defendant No. 1 changed from a partnership firm to the sole proprietorship of the Defendant No. 4. Necessary amendment to the plaint was carried out in that regard.
(2.) THE Defendant Nos. 2 and 3 filed written statement. On April 30, 2013 the Advocate for the Defendant No. 2 obtained leave to retire. Such leave was granted. By the Order dated April 30, 2013 the plaintiff was requested to serve notice on the Defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3. An affidavit of service affirmed on June 3, 2013 was filed which showed that the plaintiff despatched notices to the Defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 by registered post with acknowledgement due card. The postal envelope came back with the remark not known. The plaintiff caused issuance of two subpoenas to two banks. The authorized representatives of such bank pursuant to such subpoena produced the documents which were marked as exhibits. The plaintiff adduced evidence through its witness.
(3.) I considered the case of the plaintiff and the evidence adduced on its behalf. The Defendant No. 1 approached the plaintiff and purchased tea from the plaintiff for various quantities. The plaintiffs duly sold and delivered such tea to the Defendant No. 1.;