Arun Bhansali, J. - (1.) This first appeal under Section 96 CPC is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17.11.2008 passed by the trial court, whereby the suit filed by the appellant has been dismissed under the provisions of Order 17, Rule 3 CPC.
(2.) The appellant-Bank filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,08,131/- along with interest. The respondent-defendants were served and their written statements were closed by orders passed by the trial court on 05.09.2007 and 11.11.2008 and, thereafter, the trial court fixed the suit for plaintiff's evidence on 17.11.2008. On 17.11.2008, no witness of the appellant was present and the trial court dismissed the suit exercising its power under Order 17, Rule 3 CPC.
(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the trial court was not justified in dismissing the suit merely because on the first date fixed by the trial court for evidence, the plaintiff's witness was not present and, therefore, the judgment and decree passed by the trial court deserve to be set aside.;