The High Court dismissed the second appeal filed in a suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale. The appeal was held to be abated due to the death of the respondent without filing an application to implead their legal representatives.
The appeal is dismissed as abated; consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.
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.
1
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE DR.V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
APPEAL SUIT No.54 of 2010
JUDGMENT :
Aggrieved sole plaintiff filed this first Appeal as against the sole defendant. Learned counsel for respondent had already placed on record a memo dated 05.01.2021. Today Sri T.V.Jaggireddy, learned counsel for respondent is present and submits that the sole respondent died long back and memo was filed furnishing details of the proposed legal representatives. So far no such application has been filed to implead legal representatives.
2
order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any, stand closed.
JUSTICE DR.V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
Date :23.12.2023
GRL
3
25
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE DR.V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
APPEAL SUIT No.54 of 2010
Date:23.12.2023
GRL.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal stands abated due to the death of the respondent without impleadment of legal representatives.
Whether the suit for specific performance is maintainable by the appellant in light of the procedural defect.
Sri V.S.R.Anjaneyulu
Sole Respondent (Deceased)
DR.V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
