High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Shankar Singh & Ors vs Shyam Sunderi Devi & Anr on 30 June, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Shankar Singh & Ors vs Shyam Sunderi Devi & Anr on 30 June, 2011
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                        FA No.486 of 1974
                        Shankar Singh & Ors
                              Versus
                     Shyam Sunderi Devi & Anr
                            -----------

94. 30.06.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the parties on

interlocutory application No.8180 of 2009.

(2) This interlocutory application has been filed

for substitution of the legal representatives of the

deceased appellant No.7(iii), 7(v), 8 and 18. The

details of the legal representatives have been

mentioned in paragraph 2, 3, 4, 5 of the said

substitution application. Out of the said legal

representatives, some of them have appeared by filing

Vakalatnama but some of them have not appeared

through Vakalatnama. The details of the legal

representatives who have not appeared have been

mentioned in paragraph 3, 4, 5 of I.A. No.1340 of 2011.

The learned counsel for the respondent has got no

objection to the substitution of the legal

representatives. According to him, the legal

representatives who are sought to be transposed as

respondent will delay the matter and, therefore, the

appellant be directed to file Vakalatnama and if no

Vakalatnama is filed on their behalf, no notice may be

issued to them, otherwise it will delay in disposal of the

appeal which is of the year 1974 and the lower court
2

records were destroyed in the flood of the year 1975-

76, the lower court records have been reconstructed.

(3) Considering the above facts and

circumstances of the case, both the interlocutory

applications are allowed, i.e., I.A. No.8180 of 2009 and

I.A. No.1340 of 2011. However, no notice is required

to be issued to the newly transposed respondents

because some of the legal representatives of the

deceased appellants have already appeared by filing

Vakalatnama and they are appellant who are

challenging the impugned Judgment and Decree and in

view of order 41 Rule 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure,

the Judgment and Decree can also be molded in favour

of the respondents who have not appealed against the

impugned Judgment and Decree.

(4) The office is directed to list this First Appeal

under the heading for hearing without paper book after

one month, if it is otherwise ready.

(5) So far I.A. No.1341 of 2011 is concerned, it

is allowed and the appellant Nos.2, 4, 5, 9, 11, 13, to

17 are declared as major. Vakalatnama has already

been filed on their behalf also.

Sanjeev/-                              (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)