High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ram Bachan Lohar & Ors vs Jamuna Lohar on 17 October, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Ram Bachan Lohar & Ors vs Jamuna Lohar on 17 October, 2011
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  SA No.97 of 1988
                               Ram Bachan Lohar & Ors
                                         Versus
                                     Jamuna Lohar
                                       -----------

18 17-10-2011 I.A.No. 4102 of 2003

This Interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the

appellants stating therein that appellant no.1, Ram Bachan Lohar,

died on 30th March, 2002, leaving behind the heirs and legal

representatives as mentioned in paragraph no.1 of the petition.

Another I.A.No. 5681 of 2011 has been filed under section 5 of

the Limitation Act and under Order 22 Rule 9 C.P.C. praying for

condonation of delay and setting aside abatement with regard to

the above mentioned prayer for substitution.

The respondent no.1 has filed a counter-affidavit to I.A.No.

4102 of 2003. However, there is no counter-affidavit/reply to the

statements made in I. A.No. 5681 of 2011. The learned counsel

appearing on behalf of respondent no.1/plaintiff states that he has

now no objection to the prayer for substitution in view of the order

dated 14-9-2011 passed in M.J.C.No.3603 of 2011

In view of the submissions made by the parties and the

statements made in the petition, it appears that sufficient cause has

been mentioned preventing the filing of the substitution petition

within the prescribed period and as such the delay in filing the

petition for substitution is condoned and abatement is set aside.

I.A.No. 4102 of 2003 is allowed and the names of the

heirs and legal representatives of deceased appellant no.1, as
2

mentioned in paragraph no.1 of the said petition, are substituted in

place of the deceased appellant no.1, Ram Bachan Lohar, after

expunging his name from the records of this case. It may be noted

that the heirs and legal representatives of deceased appellant no.1

have already appeared by filing Vakalatnama in this appeal.

( V. Nath, J.)
roy