Allowed

Maruti M.Karad(Died)Lrs Shivabai M.Karad and Ors. v. Dagadusaheb Santoba Satbhai Andanr

Bombay HC10 Jun 2010CA/7543/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows an application to regularize a second appeal dismissed for default after the appellant's death. It directs the registration of the appeal, impleading of legal representatives, and verification of another respondent's death status.

What did the court decide?

Applications allowed; appeal to be registered; legal representatives of appellant to be brought on record; amendment to be carried out; appellants to verify status of respondent No.2; appeal fixed for

Maruti M.Karad(Died)Lrs Shivabai M.Karad and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION 7543/2002 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION 7541/2002 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION 7542/2002 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION 7544/2002 IN SECOND APPEAL STAMP NO. 26375/1996 Maruti Mukundrao Karad Vs.

¶4

Dagdusahebd s/o Santoba Satbhai and another

¶5

Mrs. M.A. Kulkarni, Advocate for the applicants. Miss. Rashmi Hardas, Advocate for respondent No.1

¶6

[ CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J.]

¶7

PER COURT:-

¶8

The appellant’s legal representatives have moved these applications. The appellant had filed this second appeal in 1996, challenging the decree of partition and separate possession etc.. After the appeal was filed, some office objections were raised. The appellant did not remove those objections and so in 1997, the registrar dismissed the appeal for default on the part of the appellant. Subsequently, in 1998 , the appellant also died. Thereafter, the respondents took out execution proceeding in the trial court and when the notice of the execution was served on the legal representatives of the appellant, they rushed to the Court and found out as

¶9

¶10

to what had happened to this second appeal. They moved these applications for condonation of delay and to get the order of Registrar set aside and to get themselves impleaded in place of the deceased appellant. While these applications are pending, it was informed by the respondent no.1’s advocate on oral instructions that the respondent no.2 is also reported to be dead. The appellant’s advocate however has not verified this fact and has not taken steps regarding it. However, I am inclined to allow applications subject to payment of cost of Rs.1,500/- for the reasons mentioned in the applications. The applications are allowed. The appeal be registered. The legal representatives of appellant be brought on record. Amendment be carried out immediately. The appellants now shall verify whether respondent no.2 is dead and take further steps. The appeal be fixed for admission.

¶11

10^th June, 2010 tsk/

¶12

( A.V.NIRGUDE, J. )

Maruti M.Karad(Died)Lrs Shivabai M.Karad and Ors. v. Dagadusaheb Santoba Satbhai Andanr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maruti M.Karad(Died)Lrs Shivabai M.Karad and Ors. v. Dagadusaheb Santoba Satbhai Andanr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Wasudeo Kishan Mistri.Thro.G.P.a. Vs Laxmibai Deoram Mistri.

Ramrao Panduji Pacharne,and Others. Vs Ganesh Ambadas Pacharne and Others.

Shivaji Bhagoji Bobade and Others. Vs Bhaguji Abaji Bobade and Others.

M/S New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Surayyabegum Syed Isaq and Ors.

Pandhari Kerba Wadjkar and Ors. Vs Bhusaheb Mukundrao Hakke and Ors.

Mohd. Khadirkhan S/O Sherkhan Vs Karimkhan S/O Nazirkhan and Ors.