DUDHALAL Vs. KARULAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 100 of Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred by the plaintiff being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dtd. 13/9/2022 passed in Civil Appeal No.1/2022 by the District Judge, Bhanpura, District Mandsaur arising out of the judgment and decree dtd. 6/12/2021 passed in Civil Suit No.5A/2019 by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bhanpura, District Mandsaur.

(2.) The plaintiff had instituted an action against the defendants for declaration of title and permanent injunction with respect to the suit land. Rughnath was impleaded as defendant No.2 to the suit. He did not contest the claim by filing any written statement. The claim was contested only by defendant No.1. During pendency of the suit, Rughnath died on 22/3/2019 but no steps for bringing his legal representatives on record were taken by plaintiff. The suit was decided on merits by judgment and decree dtd. 6/12/2021 by the trial Court and was dismissed.

(3.) In appeal preferred by the plaintiff, notices were issued to the defendants. The notice issued to Rughnath was received back with the note that he has expired. The plaintiff then filed an application under Order 22 Rule 4 of the CPC for bringing his legal representatives on record. By order dtd. 12/9/2022 the said application was rejected by the Appellate Court finding no sufficient cause having been made out for permitting substitution. Thereafter, it proceeded to decide the appeal and dismissed the same on merits as well as recorded a finding to the effect that the same stands abated in view of death of Rughnath.