Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sh. Neeraj Justa vs . State Of H.P. on 24 May, 2023
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
Sh. Neeraj Justa vs. State of H.P. .
RFA No.125 of 2019 24.05.2023 Present Ms. Seema K. Guleria, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Rahul Thakur, Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Ms. Avni Kochhar Mehta, Deputy Advocate Generals, for the respondent-State. Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate vice Mr. V.D.Khidtta, Advocate, for respondent No.21(a) to 21(e).
CMP(M) Nos.751 & 752 of 2022 By way of instant applications filed under Order 22 Rules 4 and 9 CPC and Section 5 of the Limitation Act, prayer has been made on behalf of the applicants-appellants for bringing on record the LRs of deceased respondent No. 21, Sh. Shyam Lal, who has expired on 18.03.2019, leaving behind his LR, as detailed in para-3 of the application bearing CMP(M) No.751 of 2022, after condoning the delay and setting aside the abatement, if any.
Pursuant to the notice issued in terms of order dated 4.01.2023, Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate vice Mr. V.D.Khidtta, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of proposed LR No.21 (a) to 21(e).
Having carefully perused the averments contained in the application bearing CMP (M) No.752 of 2022, which is duly supported by affidavit, this Court is convinced and satisfied that delay in maintaining the application bearing CMP (M) No.751 of 2022 is neither intentional nor willful, rather same has occurred on account of the circumstances, which were completely beyond the control of the applicants/appellants and as such, delay in filing the application is condoned. Abatement, if any, is set-aside.
Careful perusal of the application bearing CMP(M) ::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2023 20:34:41 :::CIS No.751 of 2022, which is duly supported by an affidavit as well as .
documents annexed with the application reveals that respondent No. 21, Sh. Shyam Lal has expired on 18.03.2019, leaving behind his LR, as detailed in para-3 of the application. Since right to sue survives in favour of the LR proposed to be substituted in place of deceased respondent No.21, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the application.
r Consequently, in view of the above, the present application is allowed and the persons named in para-3 of the application bearing CMP(M) No.751 of 2022 are ordered to be substituted in place of deceased respondent No. 21, whose name otherwise ordered to be deleted from the array of the parties.
Registry is directed to carry out necessary correction in the memo of the parties on the basis of the amended memo to be filed by learned counsel for the applicants/appellants within a period of two week. The applications stand disposed of.
RFA No.125 of 2019Since Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate has already put in appearance on behalf of LR No.21 (a) to 21(e), there is no necessity to issue notice to them, however, he may file Power of Attorney, within a period two weeks.
(Sandeep Sharma) Judge May 24,2023 (shankar) ::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2023 20:34:41 :::CIS