SITARAM Vs. GULAB SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I would like to begin this judgment with the well settled observation of Their Lordships made by the learned Judge Venkatarama Ayyar who speaking for the Bench ruled as under in a case reported in AIR 1954 SC 340 Kiran Singh and others v. Chaman Paswan and others.

(2.) TO dispose of this Writ, I need not burden this judgment with facts muchless in detail as they are not necessary. Suffice to say the proceedings arise out of a revisionary order passed by the Board of Revenue dated 22nd June 2000 (Annexure P-10) rendered in Case No. R-188/One/902 which in turn arise out of an order passed by Additional Commissioner in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction in appeal being Appeal No. 63/87-88 decided on 11.8.1992 between the two private parties who are petitioner herein and respondent No. 1 Gulab Singh.

(3.) THE impugned order, is, therefore, not sustainable in the eye of law - it having been passed in a case where one of the litigant was a dead person or in other words it is passed between the parties who was not represented in its real sense. It is of no significance whether it resulted in a decision going in favour of a dead person or against him because any order passed in a litigation when the lis is not pending is no order in the eye of law and hence it is liable to be set aside - it being a nullity.