Ram Sarup vs Munshi And Others(And Connected ... on 30 August, 1962
6. The question whether when one of the appellants dies pending appeal and his legal heirs and representatives are not brought on record, the appeal can be proceeded with, depends upon the circumstances of the case. The criterion which is normally adopted in such cases is whether in the event of the appeal being allowed in favour of the remaining appellants there would or would not be contradictory decrees. It is held that when it gives rise to contradictory decrees, the appeal abates as a whole. That view has been taken by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Nathu Ram ; Ram Sarup's case (supra) and HariharPradad v. Balmiki Prasad . Though the said case had arisen under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, the principle laid down by the Supreme Court, in my opinion, has a general application and should apply to all judicial proceedings. The rule making authority could not have intended to frame a regulation contrary to this general principle. Therefore, even though Regulation appears to have been worded in such a manner as to create an impression that appeal or revision before the Tribunal will abate as regards deceased only, and has to be proceeded with as regards the remaining appellants or applicants, it will have to be read consistently with this general principle. If the said Regulation is not read in that manner, it would create an anomalous situation. For example, in a given case it may happen that a tenant is declared to be a deemed purchaser of a particular land and such an order becomes final qua one co-owner and qua the other co-owner a contrary finding viz., that the said tenant is not a deemed purchaser may be recorded, if Regulation 24 is interpreted in the manner suggested by the learned Advocate for the respondent. Therefore, the words, "Otherwise it shall be proceeded with as regards the remaining appellants or applicants" will have to be interpreted to mean that the appeal or application shall be proceeded with as regards the remaining appellants or the applicants where otherwise it is possible to proceed with the same, without giving inconsistent findings and passing inconsistent orders.