The bench treated First Appeal No. 10 of 2009 as abated due to the appellant's death without substitution. It allowed an IA to delete a deceased cross objector's name but directed counsel to explain how the appeal and cross objection survive.
IA No. 3217 of 2018 allowed; deletion of Harendra Kumar Sinha's name permitted.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
F. A. No. 10 of 2009 With C.O. No. 7 of 2011 With I.A. No. 3217 of 2018
Man Bahal Ram Sahu … … Appellant
Versus Santosh Prasad @ Santosh Kumar Sahu and Ors. … … Respondents ---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---
07 /23.01.2019 F.A. No. 10 of 2009
1. Nobody appears on behalf of the appellant.
2. Counsel for the submits that a respondents
supplementary affidavit has been filed in this case as back as on 10.04.2018 intimating that the sole appellant has expired, but till date, no application for substitution has been filed and accordingly, the appeal has abated.
3. Considering the submissions made, it appears that on 10.04.2018, an affidavit was filed by the respondents intimating that the sole appellant had expired, but in spite of that, no petition for substitution has been filed. Accordingly, this first appeal stands abated.
I.A. No. 3217 of 2018 in C.O. No. 7 of 2011
1. Counsel for the appellant has filed this interlocutory application intimating that the cross objector no. 6 namely, Harendra Kumar Sinha has expired and his legal heirs are already on record as Cross Objector Nos. 2 to 5 of this cross objection. Accordingly, he seeks permission to delete the name of Harendra Kumar Sinha from the cause title.
2. Considering the submissions made, I.A. No. 3217 of 2018 is hereby allowed and the counsel for the cross objectors is permitted to delete the name of Harendra Kumar Singh from the cause-title of C.O. No. 7 of 2011 during the course of the day.
2
3. This Court finds that the connected First Appeal No. 10 of 2009 has already been treated as abated on account of no step has been taken for substitution of the sole appellant . Counsel for the appellant undertakes to satisfy this Court on the next date as to how this cross objection will survive, when the first appeal has already been treated as abated and also satisfy the court as to how the cross objection will survive when sole respondent in the cross objection has expired long back .
4. Post this Case on 30.01.2019 under the headings for ‘Orders’.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Mukul
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a first appeal abates when the sole appellant expires without substituting legal heirs.
Man Bahal Ram Sahu
Santosh Prasad @ Santosh Kumar Sahu
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
