The High Court at Lucknow dismissed the second appeal as abated, holding that valid service of notice could not be made on respondents 1 and 2 as they had died.
Appeal dismissed as it abated against respondents 1 and 2.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:4242
Court No. - 4
Case :- SECOND APPEAL No. - 397 of 1990
Appellant :- Raja Ram Respondent :- Smt.Parwati And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Avadhesh Kumar
Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.
Shri Avadhesh Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the parties have entered into compromise, therefore the appellant does not want to press the appeal.
As per office report though the notice was deemed sufficient on respondent no.3, however the notice could not be served on respondents no.1 and 2 as they were reported dead.
In view of above this appeal stands abated against the respondents no.1 and 2.
Dismissed accordingly.
. .......................................... .(Rajnish Kumar,J.) Order Date :- 16.1.2024 Banswar
Digitally signed by :- RAM NARESH BANSWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Raja Ram
Smt. Parwati
Others
Rajnish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
