Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Patna High Court - Orders

Raghubir Pandey & Ors vs Gautam Pandey & Ors on 7 September, 2015

Author: Mungeshwar Sahoo

Bench: Mungeshwar Sahoo

       Patna High Court FA No.519 of 1984 (12) dt.07-09-2015
                                                  1




                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                        First Appeal No.519 of 1984
                    ======================================================
                    Raghubir Pandey & Ors
                                                                     .... .... Appellant/s
                                                   Versus
                    Gautam Pandey & Ors
                                                                    .... .... Respondent/s
                    ======================================================
                    Appearance :
                    For the Appellant/s   :   Mr. Suresh Ch. Pd.
                                              Mr. B.P.Sinha

                    For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K.Mishra
                    ======================================================
                    CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR
                    SAHOO
                    ORAL ORDER

12   07-09-2015

Perused the office note dated 25.08.2015.

In view of the office note, the order dated 01.04.2013 is modified to the extent that further two weeks time is granted to file substitution application regarding the death of respondent Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5. In the order, by mistake, it is typed as respondent Nos.1 to 4 and 5. Consequently, the subsequent order also stands modified to that effect i.e. order dated 13.08.2015 and it is held that the appeal has abated for non-substitution of the legal representatives of the deceased respondent Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5.

From perusal of the memo of appeal, it appears that the only plaintiff-respondent Nos.1 and 2 were the contesting respondents in whose favour, the decree has been passed. Since the appeal has abated against respondent Nos.1 and 2 also, who were the plaintiffs in the court below, therefore, in their absence, Patna High Court FA No.519 of 1984 (12) dt.07-09-2015 2 the appeal cannot proceed. Accordingly, the appeal has already been rightly dismissed as incompetent.

(Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) Saurabh/-

U