Dismissed¶27

Mastan Singh v. Darbara Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Jan 2026RSA/928/1993

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Abatement of appeal for non-substitution of LRs of deceased contesting respondent; Order 22 Rule 4 CPC; Section 151 CPC; impleading legal representatives; Suresh Chandra (deceased) vs. Parasram, 2025 INSC 873; Punjab and Haryana High Court; RSA-928-1993 (O&M); Deepak Gupta, J.; decision dated 09.01.2026; appellants and advocates: Mastan Singh (Avtar Singh Bha[corrupted]), Vinay Pandey, Rajinder Goyal.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the appellant: appeal dismissed as abated. Interlocutory relief: CM-16543-C-2025 allowed, permitting the LRs of deceased respondent No.1(i) Pritam Kaur to be brought on record; pending application(s), if any, disposed of. ¶27

Mastan Singh Vs Darbara Singh — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

********

¶3

102

¶4

RSA-928-1993 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.01.2026

¶5

Mastan Singh …..Appellant Vs. Darbara Singh (deceased) through LRs and Others .….Respondents

¶6

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

¶7

Present:Mr. Avtar Singh Bha�, Advocate for the appellant.

¶8

Mr. Vinay Pandey, Advocate for respondent Nos.1(i)(a) to (i)(c).

¶9

Mr. Rajinder Goyal, Advocate for respondent Nos.3(i) to 3(ii).

¶10

¶11

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶12

CM-16543-C-2025:

¶13

This is an applica(on under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC read with

¶14

Sec(on 151 CPC to bring on record LRs of deceased-respondent No.1(i) Pritam Kaur.

¶15

Applica(on is supported by affidavit of Harbhajan Singh; besides copy of death cer(ficate (Annexure A-1).

¶16

Allowed subject to all just and legal excep(ons.

¶17

Persons men(oned in para No.2 of the applica(on are

¶18

permi9ed to be brought on record as LRs of deceased-respondent No.1(i) Pritam Kaur.

¶19

Amended memo of par(es is taken on record.

¶20

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.01.09 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

RSA-928-1993 (O&M)

¶22

-2-

¶23

Main case.:

¶24

At the outset, it is argued by learned counsel for the respondents that once the LRs of contes(ng respondent No.2 San( have not been brought on record despite sufficient opportuni(es, the appeal deserved to be dismssed being abated, in view of the legal posi(on explained by Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Suresh Chandra (deceased) vs.

¶25

Parasram” 2025 INSC 873.

¶26

Learned counsel for the respondent(s) could not dispute the aforesaid conten(on.

¶27

In view of the legal posi(on expalined in Suresh Chandra’s case (supra) , the present appeal is hereby dismissed having been abated.

¶28

Pending applica(on(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶29

(DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE January 09, 2026 Nee(ka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶30

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.01.09 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Mastan Singh v. Darbara Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mastan Singh v. Darbara Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sham Singh Vs Ludhiana Improvement Trust and Anr.

Devesh Kumar Vs Mdu Rohtak

Sadhu Ram Vs Rajinder Deva Yateem Khana Trust and Another

Kuldeep Vs Raj Kumar and Others

Om Parkash Singh Vs Raj Kumar and Others

Joginder Singh Vs Raj Kumar and Others