This appellate court, noting the respondent's death and subsequent failure despite granted time extensions to name legal heirs, held that the limitation for substitution had expired. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as abated against the sole respondent.
The appeal was held to have abated against the sole respondent and dismissed.
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.
[2023/RJJD/007752]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 969/2011
Dharmendra Cement Agency through Proprietor Dharma S/o Hema Dangi, aged about 48 years, R/o Medta, Tehsil Mavli, District Udaipur.
----Appellant
Versus
Shri Hamera S/o Varda Dangi, R/o Nandvel, Tehsil Mavli, District Udaipur.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Ms. Nidhi Singhvi
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
28/03/2023
On 04.01.2021, when the matter was listed before the Court, it was observed that as per the office report, the respondent has expired on 04.07.2017. On that date learned counsel for the appellant prayed for time to take necessary steps qua the deceased respondent. The steps as required were not taken by the learned counsel and on 04.01.2022, when the matter was listed, eight weeks further time was granted to do the needful. Till date no steps qua the deceased respondent have been taken. Today also learned counsel for the appellant sought time to do the needful.
In the opinion of this Court, the respondent has expired on 04.07.2017, the limitation as provided under law for substitution of his legal representatives has expired way back and even after the time being granted in the year 2021 and further in the year
[2023/RJJD/007752]
[CFA-969/2011]
(2 of 2)
2022, no steps have been taken till date therefore, no further time deserves to be granted to learned counsel for the appellant.
In view of the same, the present appeal stands abated against the sole respondent and as a consequence, the appeal itself stands dismissed .
All pending applications stand disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J
30-AbhishekS/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present appeal stands abated due to the expiration of the respondent and failure to take necessary steps for substitution within the limitation period.
Dharmendra Cement Agency through Proprietor Dharma S/o Hema Dangi
Shri Hamera S/o Varda Dangi
Rekha Borana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
