The appeal was dismissed as infructuous. The second respondent, the legal heir to both the appellant and the respondents, could not represent the appellant while also being a party to the suit, leading to a conflict of interest.
No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
A.S.NO.1954 OF 1998
JUDGMENT :
The appellant/plaintiff died long back and the 2nd respondent, who was impleaded in this appeal alone, is the legal heir for both plaintiff/appellant and defendant/respondents. Therefore, there is none to represent the appellant and consequently, the 2nd respondent cannot act as both appellant and respondent as the 2nd respondent himself succeeded to the property.
In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal has become infructuous.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions in this appeal, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________________ M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY,J 24.06.2015 kvrm
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
A.S.NO.1954 OF 1998
DATE: 24.06.2015
kvrm
M.Saty Narayana Murthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
