Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Akb Shukamal Kanti Dey vs Hemendra Kumar Chowdhury on 27 February, 2019
Author: Sahidullah Munshi
Bench: Sahidullah Munshi
1 2 27.2.19 C.O. 2988 of 2018 akb Shukamal Kanti Dey
-Versus-
Hemendra Kumar Chowdhury Mr. Siva Prosad Ghose Mr. Chandra Bhanu Sinha Mr. Rohit Kumart Shaw ...For the Petitioner Mr. Arijit Sarkar ...For the Opposite Party Learned Advocate appearing for the opposite party submits that this revisional application is not maintainable against a dead person.
It appears from the record that the opposite party Hemendra Kumar Chowdhury is the decree-holder, who filed Ejectment Execution No. 18 of 2013. It further appears from the order dated April 21, 2018 that the sole decree- holder has expired on February 08, 2018 leaving behind his legal heirs and successors, who have made application for substitution of their names in place of deceased decree- holder and have already been substituted in the Ejectment Execution case.
Let xerox copy of such documents produced by the learned Advocate for the opposite party be taken on record.
Therefore, this revisional application in its present form is not maintainable, as no proceeding can be 2 maintained against a dead person.
The revisioinal application is dismissed. However, this order of dismissal will not prevent the petitioner to take out a fresh application against the substituted legal heirs of the decree-holder.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, on priority basis.
( Sahidullah Munshi, J.)