Allowed

Chabila Ram v. Deva Ram

Rajasthan HC26 Mar 2021CRES/105/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a restoration application for a dismissed civil first appeal, condoned the delay in filing under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, set aside abatement under Order XXII Rule 9 CPC, and took legal representatives of deceased parties on record.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of appeal S.B. Civil First Appeal No.157/1990, condonation of delay, setting aside abatement, and impleadment of legal representatives allowed.

Chabila Ram Vs Deva Ram — Succession and Inheritance | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Restoration No. 105/2020

¶3

Chabila Ram S/o Sh. Khetaram, aged about 71 years, R/o village Sahuwala, Tehsil Bhadra, District Sri Ganganagar.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Legal heirs of late Sh. Devaram:

¶7

Amar Pati Devi wd/o Lt. Sh. Devaram

¶8

Narma D/o Lt. Sh. Devaram

¶9

Rukma D/o Lt. Sh. Devaram

¶10

Bhatari D/o Lt. Sh. Devaram

¶11

Dani D/o Lt. Sh. Devaram

¶12

Chani D/o Lt. Sh. Devaram

¶13

Dharampal S/o Lt. Sh. Devaram

¶14

Legal representatives of Lt. Sh. Umed Singh @ Ved Singh

¶15

@ Ved Prakash S/o Lt. Sh. Devaram

¶16

8/1. Dhapi Devi wd/o Lt. Sh. Umed Singh

¶17

8/2. Suresh Kumar S/o Lt. Sh. Umed Singh

¶18

8/3. Anil Kumar S/o Lt. Sh. Umed Singh

¶19

8/4. Saroj Devi D/o Lt. Sh. Umed Singh

¶20

Hosyar Singh @ Hawaldar S/o Lt. Sh. Devaram All residents of Village Sahuwala, Tehsil Bhadra, District Sri Ganganagar.

¶21

----Respondents

¶22

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vishal Jangid for Mr. Hemant Choudhary. For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.K. Sinha.

¶23

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order

¶24

26/03/2021

¶25

The restoration application has been filed by the appellant for restoration of S.B. Civil First Appeal No.157/1990, which came to be dismissed on account of passing of the peremptory order dated 5.8.2016.

¶26

Restoration application has been filed alongwith application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the restoration application.

¶27

(2 of 3)

¶28

[CRES-105/2020]

¶29

Alongwith the restoration application, an application was filed under Order XXII Rule 4 CPC for bringing on record the legal representatives of the sole respondent – Deva Ram, another application under Order XXII Rule 9 CPC read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act was filed for setting aside abatement and condoning the delay in filing the application.

¶30

The restoration application was filed on 28.2.2018 and on account of various objections indicated by the office, the same remained pending.

¶31

Whereafter, another application under Order XXII Rule 4 CPC came to be filed for taking on record the legal representatives of proposed legal representative No.8 of Deva Ram – Umed Singh.

¶32

Power came to be filed by learned counsel on behalf of all the proposed legal representatives including legal representative of Umed Singh.

¶33

Whereafter, another application has been filed under Section 151 CPC for taking on record the compromise dated 26.12.2018 said to have been entered into between the parties duly signed by all the parties and a general Power of Attorney given by the respondents in favour of Dharampal S/o Deva Ram inter alia indicating that as the parties have settled the dispute mutually, the restoration application and the appeal may be allowed and the decree passed by the trial court be set aside.

¶34

In view of the submissions made in the application filed under Order 151 CPC, the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the application under XXII Rule 9 CPC is allowed. The delay in filing the application is condoned.

¶35

(3 of 3)

¶36

[CRES-105/2020]

¶37

The application filed under Order XXII Rule 9 CPC is allowed. The abatement is set aside.

¶38

The applications filed Order XXII Rule 4 CPC are also allowed. The legal representatives of sole respondent – Deva Ram as indicated in the first application and that of Umed Singh as indicated in the second application, are taken on record.

¶39

The amended cause title filed by the appellant alongwith second application is also taken on record.

¶40

For the reasons indicated in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the restoration application, supported by affidavit, the same is allowed. The delay in filing the restoration application is condoned.

¶41

This restoration application seeking restoration of S.B. Civil First Appeal No.157/1990 is also allowed. The appeal (S.B. Civil First Appeal No.157/1990) is restored to its original number.

¶42

As the legal representatives have been taken on record in the present restoration application, the same are ipso facto taken on record in the first appeal as well.

¶43

Learned counsel for the appellant to file amended cause title in the appeal also.

¶44

18-Sumit/-

Chabila Ram v. Deva Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chabila Ram v. Deva Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramudi Devi and Ors. Vs Kaliya and Ors.

Bhera Ram Vs State and Ors.

R C Sharma Vs Lrs of Renuka Chakrawartis

Nirmala Devi Vs Shyambai

Jogendra Vs M/S Dhariwal Motor Agency

Amjad Khan Vs Anwar Khan and Ors.