Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Partition Suit Due to Abatement — Failure to Bring Legal Heirs of Deceased Defendants on Record Renders Entire Suit Abated. The court held that in a partition suit, the right to sue is joint and indivisible, and the entire suit abates if any party dies and their legal representatives are not brought on record under Order 22 Rule 4 of CPC.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 11
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves a second appeal arising from a partition suit. The appellant, original Defendant No.1, challenged the decrees passed by the trial court and the lower appellate court. The suit was for partition and separate possession of property. During the pendency of the suit, two defendants (Defendant No.3 and Defendant No.5) died. Their legal heirs were not brought on record. The trial court passed a decree on 30.12.2009, and the lower appellate court partly allowed the appeal on 20.06.2012. The appellant contended that the entire suit abated due to the failure to bring the legal heirs of the deceased defendants on record. The High Court framed two substantial questions of law regarding abatement. The court held that in a partition suit, the right to sue is joint and indivisible; if any party dies and their legal representatives are not brought on record, the entire suit abates. The court relied on the principle that a decree for partition cannot be passed in the absence of necessary parties. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgments of the courts below, and held that the suit abated as a whole.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Abatement of Suit - Partition Suit - Order 22 Rule 4 CPC - Death of Defendant - Failure to bring legal heirs on record - The suit for partition and separate possession was filed by the plaintiff. During pendency, Defendant No.3 died on 10.07.2007 and Defendant No.5 died on 22.07.2001. Their legal heirs were not brought on record. The trial court and lower appellate court proceeded to decide the suit on merits. Held that the entire suit abates as the right to sue does not survive against the remaining defendants alone in a partition suit. (Paras 3-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the suit for partition abates entirely when some defendants die during pendency and their legal heirs are not brought on record.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court allowed the second appeal, set aside the judgments and decrees of the trial court and lower appellate court, and held that the entire suit abated.

Law Points

  • Abatement of suit
  • Partition suit
  • Legal representatives
  • Order 22 CPC
  • Entire suit abates if any party dies and legal heirs not brought on record
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (BOM) (06) 99

SECOND APPEAL NO. 979 of 2012

2015-06-29

R.K. Deshpande, J.

Mr. Drupad S. Patil, Advocate for appellant; Mr. Shailesh S. Pathak, Advocate for Respondents

Shri Pandit Ramchandra Kulkarni

Shri Shrikant Ramchandra Kulkarni & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Second appeal against decree in partition suit.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought setting aside of decrees on ground of abatement due to death of defendants.

Filing Reason

Defendant No.3 and Defendant No.5 died during pendency of suit and their legal heirs were not brought on record.

Previous Decisions

Trial Court passed decree on 30.12.2009; Lower Appellate Court partly allowed appeal on 20.06.2012.

Issues

Whether the suit for partition abates entirely when some defendants die and their legal heirs are not brought on record.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the entire suit abated due to death of Defendant No.3 and Defendant No.5 and failure to bring legal heirs on record. Respondents did not contest the legal position but submitted that the suit should not abate.

Ratio Decidendi

In a partition suit, the right to sue is joint and indivisible. If any party dies and their legal representatives are not brought on record, the entire suit abates under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC, as a decree for partition cannot be passed in the absence of necessary parties.

Judgment Excerpts

It is apparent that both the courts below could not have proceeded to decide the matter on its own merits without there being the legal representatives of the deceased defendants on record. The entire suit for partition abates.

Procedural History

Special Civil Suit No. 834 of 1994 filed for partition. During pendency, Defendant No.3 died on 10.07.2007 and Defendant No.5 died on 22.07.2001. Trial Court passed decree on 30.12.2009. Civil Appeal No. 175 of 2010 partly allowed on 20.06.2012. Second Appeal No. 979 of 2012 filed in High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 22 Rule 4
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition for Deemed License Under Section 7(1) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963 — Quashes Seizure Notice for Failure to Consider Application Within 30 Days. The C...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Passing Off Claim by Sun Pharmaceuticals Against Emcure Pharmaceuticals Over Trademarks 'SUSTEN' and 'SUSTINEX' — Marks Held Not Deceptively Similar Despite Prior Use and Pharmaceutical Products. The court found that the...