The High Court of Rajasthan held that the second appeal was abated because the sole respondent had expired and no steps were taken to substitute the legal heirs. The appeal was dismissed, and the miscellaneous application was disposed of.
The appeal was dismissed in abatement. The miscellaneous application was disposed of.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 317/2000
----Appellants
Versus
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. B.S. Chhaba, ASG For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sriram Yadav
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order
30/05/2024
(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J
CHETNA BEHRANI /57
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the second appeal stands abated due to the expiration of the sole respondent/plaintiff without proper substitution of legal heirs.
Union Of India
Mohammed Safirul
Ashok Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
