HARISH TANDON,J. - (1.) This is an application for restoration of the revisional application being CO 884 of 2017, which was dismissed for default on April 26, 2017. After perusing the averments made in the instant application, this court finds that the petitioners were prevented by sufficient cause in not appearing on the fateful day when the revisional application was called on and dismissed for default. The application for restoration being CAN 6378 of 2017 is allowed. The revisional application being CO 884 of 2017 is restored to its original file and number. By the consent of the parties, the revisional application is taken up for hearing. CO 884 of 2017. This revisional application is directed against an order date November 4, 2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Third Court, Howrah in Title Suit No. 56 of 2003 by which an application under Order 11, Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the plaintiffs/petitioners is rejected and the identical application filed by the defendants/opposite parties is allowed.
(2.) The plaintiffs/petitioners filed a suit for dissolution of partnership business which is carrying on in the name and style of M/s Andul Engineering Works with further declaration that the plaintiffs have share in the said partnership and, therefore, entitled to profits, assets and the goodwill therein.
(3.) The contesting defendants took a specific plea that the said partnership business commenced on the basis of a deed of partnership executed on April 1, 1964 between Nilmoni Jetty, Dulal Jetty and Gobindalal Jetty. It is in dispute that the said deed of partnership reveals that the aforesaid three partners shall have equal shares in profit and loss of the said partnership firm. It is a specific case of the contesting defendants that the said Nilmoni took away all his shares and profits in the partnership business and have shown his intention to continue the said business in partnership with the other partners. It is further averred that subsequent to the retirement/relinquishment of the rights by the Nilmoni in the said partnership business, the said partnership firm was reconstituted thrice and in fact, the present partners are running the said business in partnership. In other words, the contesting defendants deny the right and interest of the plaintiffs who claimed through said Nilmoni, who admittedly died in the year 1987.;