Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a civil suit concerning a property owned by Shivram, the father of the appellant and respondent No. 3, Tarabai. After Shivram's death, Tarabai was recorded as a nominee in the Cooperative Housing Society and later entered into a sale agreement with the original plaintiffs. When Tarabai failed to execute the sale deed, the plaintiffs filed a suit against her and her children. The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, leading to appeals that were dismissed for non-prosecution. The appellant sought to restore the appeal concerning Tarabai after her death, but the High Court allowed restoration only for another respondent, leading to the present appeal. The Supreme Court analyzed the procedural history and the legal implications of abatement due to the death of a party. It noted that the legal representatives of the deceased were already on record and that the High Court's refusal to restore the appeal concerning respondent No. 3 was erroneous. The court highlighted that the absence of a formal order of abatement did not preclude the revival of the appeal. Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal without costs, ensuring that the matter could be heard on its merits.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Abatement of Appeal - Restoration of Appeal - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 100 - The court held that the High Court erred in refusing to restore the appeal concerning respondent No. 3, as her legal representatives were already on record, and the appeal should not abate due to her death. The court emphasized that the absence of a specific order dismissing the suit as abated did not prevent the revival of the appeal (Paras 13-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appeal could be restored concerning the deceased respondent No. 3.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, ruling that the appeal should not abate concerning respondent No. 3 as her legal representatives were already on record, and there was no formal order of abatement.
Law Points
- Abatement of appeal
- restoration of appeal
- legal representatives
- procedural errors
- sufficient cause for delay
