Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Civil Matter — Second Appeal Remanded for Fresh Consideration. The court found that the death of one plaintiff does not abate the appeal as the cause of action survives against the surviving plaintiff under Order XXII of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.

  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved a dispute over a civil suit for declaration and possession filed by two sons of Tukaram Rodge against the sons of Gangaram Rodge. The suit was initially dismissed in 1982, but the First Appellate Court decreed it in favor of the plaintiffs in 1992. The defendants then filed a Second Appeal in the High Court, where the plaintiffs were Respondents. During the pendency of the appeal, one of the plaintiffs died, leading the High Court to dismiss the appeal on the grounds of abatement due to the failure to bring the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff on record. The Supreme Court found that the High Court erred in its judgment, stating that the death of one plaintiff does not abate the appeal as the cause of action survives against the surviving plaintiff. The court referenced the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, particularly Order XXII, which clarifies that the right to sue survives against the surviving party. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court's dismissal, and remanded the Second Appeal for fresh consideration on merits, requesting the High Court to expedite the hearing. The decision emphasized the importance of ensuring that the legal rights of surviving parties are upheld in civil litigation.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Abatement of Appeal - Survival of Cause of Action - Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order XXII Rule 2 - The court held that the death of one of the decree holders does not lead to abatement of the appeal as the cause of action survives against the surviving plaintiff. The High Court's dismissal of the Second Appeal on the grounds of abatement was erroneous and contrary to law. (Paras 5-10)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Second Appeal abated due to the death of one of the plaintiffs.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court's dismissal of the Second Appeal and the application to set aside abatement, and remanded the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration on merits.

Law Points

  • Abatement of appeal
  • survival of cause of action
  • Civil Procedure Code
  • 1908
  • Order XXII Rule 2
  • Order XXII Rule 11
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (SC) (08) 211

Civil Appeal Nos. 5067-5068 of 2022

2022-08-03

Indira Banerjee, V. Ramasubramanian

Shashibhushan P. Adgaonkar, Omkar J. Deshpande, Rohini Wagh, Ilin Saraswat, Aalekh Wagh, Devendra Kumar Shukla

Sakharam since deceased through L.Rs & Anr.

Kishanrao

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

Nature of Litigation

Civil dispute over declaration and possession of property

Remedy Sought

Restoration of Second Appeal and setting aside of abatement

Filing Reason

Dismissal of Second Appeal by the High Court due to abatement

Previous Decisions

Initial suit dismissed in 1982, First Appeal decreed in 1992, Second Appeal dismissed by High Court

Issues

Whether the Second Appeal abated due to the death of one of the plaintiffs

Submissions/Arguments

The appellants argued that the appeal should not abate as the cause of action survives against the surviving plaintiff. The respondents contended that the appeal abated due to the death of one plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi

The death of one of the plaintiffs does not lead to the abatement of the appeal as the cause of action survives against the surviving plaintiff, as per the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code.

Judgment Excerpts

The High Court fell into an error in thinking that the Second Appeal abated upon the death of Respondent No.2. The dismissal of the Second Appeal by the High Court on the ground that the appeal stood abated, without going into the merits of the case is not in accordance with law.

Procedural History

The case originated from a civil suit filed in 1982, followed by a Regular First Appeal in 1982, and a Second Appeal filed in 1993 which was dismissed by the High Court due to abatement.

Acts & Sections

  • Civil Procedure Code, 1908: Order XXII Rule 2, Order XXII Rule 11
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Employer's Petition Against Exparte Labour Court Award for Violation of Natural Justice. Employer Denied Opportunity to Defend Due to Non-Service of Notice, Award Set Aside and Matter Remanded.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Divisional Commissioner's Order Cancelling Explosives Licence for Violation of Natural Justice. Failure to Provide Copy of Appeal and Hearing to Licencee Renders Appellate Order Unsustainable Under Explosives Act, 1884.