MUSSTT. EKLATUN NESSA LASKAR Vs. DURJYODHAN DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a civil revision filed by the legal representatives of defendant No. 7 (late -Tajmul Ali Laskar) under Section 115 of C.P. Code against the order dated 14.7.2011 passed by Additional District Judge, Cacher (Silchar) in TA No. 36 of 2006 and also against the order dated 6.3.2013 passed by Munsiff No. 2 Cachar, Silchar in TS No. 148 of 2011.

(2.) FACTS of the case need mention in brief to appreciate the short controversy involved in the revision.

(3.) TAJMUL Ali Laskar felt aggrieved of the part compromise decree passed by the trial court, filed first appeal before the Additional District Judge, Cacher (Silchar) being TA 36 of 2006. During pendency of this appeal, Tajmul Ali Laskar died on 17.4.2009. The petitioners of this revision claiming to be the legal representatives of late Tajmul Ali Laskar filed an application under Order 22 Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure for substitution of their names in the appeal in place of appellant (Tajmul Ali Laskar). It is this application, which was dismissed by the appellate court on the ground that since the application for substitution was filed beyond the period of 90 days from the date of death of Tajmul Ali Laskar and hence the appeal stood abated. The appellate court therefore dismissed the appeal as having abated on 14.7.2011.