19.Pending the Appeal the defendant had died and her legal representatives had been brought on record. One of the respondents had also died and his legal representatives had also been brought on record. Not all the legal representatives of the defendant have filed this appeal. The appeal is now urged only by the 11th respondent one of the legal heirs, who claimed that the Court should revisit and re-examine the reasonings of both the trial Court and the first Appellate Court. He had filed C.M.P.No.9089 of 2016 to transpose himself as the 7th appellant to prosecute the appeal further. However, a learned Single Judge of this Court had dismissed the Second Appeal by order dated 09.07.2010 for non appearance since the appellant had died and steps had not been taken to bring on record the legal representatives. Thereafter, the Second Appeal had been restored, but again the appellants did not show any inclination to appear before the Court and therefore, once again the Second Appeal was dismissed by judgment dated 21.03.2022. It had been noted that steps had not been taken to implead the legal representatives of the 8th respondent. The Appeal was dismissed on the ground of abatement.
