SADIQUR RAHMAN Vs. RAMKISHAN BUNG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 546 of 2001 on the file of the XII Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court (Fast Track Court), Hyderabad filed this appeal, feeling aggrieved by the dismissal of the suit, through judgment, dated 20.09.2009. The suit was filed for the relief of cancellation of sale deeds executed by the 3rd defendant, in favour of defendants 1 and 2. In the appeal, this Court passed an interim order restraining the respondents from alienating the suit schedule property. Respondents 1 and 2, in turn, filed an application with a prayer to vacate the interim order. One of the grounds raised by them was that though the 3rd respondent died on 09.10.2006 itself, the appeal was presented on 23.02.2007 showing as though he was alive. The appellants filed a set of three applications for setting aside the abatement caused on account of the death of the 3rd respondent-defendant, for condonation of delay in filing the application and for bringing the legal representatives of the 3rd respondent on record.

(2.) Respondents 1 and 2 on the one hand and the proposed legal representatives on the other filed counter-affidavits.

(3.) Sri K. Raghuveer Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants, submits that inclusion of the 3rd respondent in the array of the parties was due to inadvertence and in a way, his clients were not aware of the death of the 3rd respondent though they are brothers. The ignorance is said to be on account of the strained relationship. He further submits that the estate of the deceased 3rd respondent is already represented by respondents 1 and 2, being the transferees of the property and strictly speaking, there is no abatement at all. Alternatively, he submits that this Court can take adequate measures in exercise of powers under Section 153 C.P.C. and Section 21 of the Limitation Act. He has placed reliance upon certain precedents.