IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
FA No.613 of 1985
Sukhraj Mistry & Ors
Versus
Rajkishore Mistry & Ors
-----------
42. 19.10.2011 Perused the office note dated 18.10.2011.
Item no.1
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants on I.A.
No.2161 of 2009.
This Interlocutory Application has been filed for
expunging the name of deceased appellant no.1 on the
ground that his legal representatives are already on record
as appellant nos.2 to 5. In view of the above facts, the
Interlocutory Application is allowed and the name of
appellant no.1 is expunged from the cause title of memo of
appeal.
Item no.2
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants on I.A.
No.6731 of 2011.
This is a substitution application. It is within time.
Accordingly, the I.A. No.6731 of 2011 is allowed and the
legal representatives of the deceased appellant no.2 as
mentioned in detail in paragraph 1 of the substitution
application are substituted in place of the deceased
appellant no.2 after deleting the name of the appellant no.2.
All the legal representatives have already appeared by filing
vakalatnama.
Saurabh (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)