No. 10/05.01.2010.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

Decree Holder/O.P. No. 1 is present through Ld. Advocate Mr. R. K. Choumal.  When the matter was heard on the last occasion on behalf of the JDR/Revisionist Mr. Sukhendhu Chatterjee, the Ld. Advocate challenging the order impugned alleged that substitution was illegal.  The reason had been said that the O.P. No. 1 is an unregistered firm and, therefore, on the death of one of the partners abatement had taken place.  Considering the said question the Bench granted opportunity to the Revisionist to show the nature of the partnership.  Today when the matter was called none appeared for the Revisionist nor any material has been produced to show that the partnership was unregistered firm.  Mr. R. K. Choumal, Ld. Advocate for O.P. No. 1 referred to Rule 4 of Order XXX C.P.C.  On the materials available we have no reason to presume that the firm is unregistered.  In the complaint the O.P. No. 1 firm has been described as a registered partnership firm.  The same has been done in the Cause Title of the present revision also.  The said case has not been made out in the revision petition in any effective manner.  In the circumstances the only contention having not been substantiated the contention of the revisionist fails and the revision is dismissed.