KRISHAN LAL Vs. FAQIR CHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FAQIR Chand, one of the decree -holders, died on 27th May 1970. No attempt has been made to bring on record his legal representatives. Therefore, the appeal so far as Faqir Chand is concerned has abated. The only question to be determined is whether the abatement would be total or partial. This will depend on the nature of the decree. I have gone through the decree and find that it is a joint and indivisible decree. That being so, the abatement will be total.

(2.) FACED with this situation, Mr. Roop Chand urged a novel argument. His argument is that the suit was filed by Kirpa Ram. Kirpa Ram died and his legal representatives were duly brought on the record. One of the legal representatives was Faqir Chand. The argument proceeds as the estate of Kirpa Ram is duly represented, therefore, the estate of Faqir Chand is duly represented. To say the least, this is the most fantastic argument ever addressed in a court of law; and I have no hesitation in repelling the same.