Prakash Tatia, J. - (1.) AT the request of learned Counsel for the parties, the appeal itself is heard finally.
(2.) THE appellants ' contention is that the case was fixed for the evidence of the defendants on 03.04.2006 and on that day no instruction was pleaded by their counsel and the trial Court closed the evidence of the defendants on the same day and thereafter, decreed the suit of the plaintiffs. Since there was no evidence in rebuttal of the defendants, therefore, the suit was decreed. According to learned Counsel for the appellants, the appellants had no knowledge that their advocate will plead no instruction on 03.04.2006. It is also submitted that on 02.02.2006, the plaintiffs ' evidence was closed and first date for evidence of the defendants was fixed on 06.03.2006 and on 03.04.2006 the counsel for the appellants -defendants pleaded no instruction. It is submitted that a liberal view be taken and the appellants may be given an opportunity to produce their evidence. Learned Counsel for the plaintiffs -respondents submitted that appellants -defendants themselves did not appear for evidence on 06.03.2006 and on 03.04.2006 and there was no explanation for their non -appearance. It is submitted that on that date, the date was fixed for evidence of the defendants. It is also submitted that the counsel pleaded no instruction then Court had no option but to close the evidence as witnesses of the defendantsappellants were not present in Court.
(3.) I considered the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record also.;