PRADEEP KUMAR SAHANI Vs. SANJUKTA HOTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 02.03.2012 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Sambalpur in F.A.O. No.11 of 2011 is called in question in this writ petition.

(2.) The plaintiff in Civil Suit No.7 of 2011 has preferred an appeal under Order XLIII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, hereinafter referred as the "Code" for brevity. During pendency of the appeal, respondent no.3 Kulamani Biswal expired on 20.04.2011 leaving behind his legal heirs. On05.07.2011, the plaintiff filed an application for substitution of the said deceased-respondent. Copies of the said petition were served on the contesting respondents, but none has filed any written objection to the same. Hence, on 17.08.2011, the learned Addl. District Judge, Sambalpur allowed the substitution petition and directed the appellants to file consolidated appeal memo.

(3.) On 22.02.2012, after a lapse of about six months, the respondent nos. 6, 7 and 11 have filed an application to direct that the appeal has abated.