BHAU RAM Vs. KAMLA DEVI ALIAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Earlier decree and judgment dated 8.12.1995 passed by this Court has been set-aside by the Supreme Court on the ground that paragraph 32 of Himachal Pradesh (Courts) Order, 1948 could no longer survive after the establishment of Himachal Pradesh High Court wherein Section 100 C.P.C. would be applicable for deciding second appeals and keeping in view the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kshitish Chandra Purkait v. Santosh Kumar Purkait and others, directions have been issued to restore the appeal to its original number and redecide the same on merits after hearing the parties keeping in view the limited jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 100 C.P.C.

(2.) When this appeal was taken up on remand, it was pointed out that respondent No. 2, namely, Panu Ram had died in the meantime and the appellant was permitted to take steps for bringing on record his legal representatives. Ultimately by order dated 16.3.2000 passed in CMP (M) No. 599 of 1999, legal representatives of deceased respondent No. 2 Panu Ram were brought on record after condoning the delay for the sufficient cause shown in the application and also for the reason that the estate of deceased respondent No. 2 Panu Ram was represented by his wife respondent No. 1 Smt. Kamla Devi, who was already on record. Thereafter the appeal is heard on merits.

(3.) The appeal is directed against the decree and judgment dated 2.12.1987 passed by Additional District Judge (2), Shimla, whereby the appeal of the respondents-defendants was allowed and decree and judgment dated 25.3.1985 of Sub Judge (I), Shimla was set-aside as a consequence of which the suit of the appellant-plaintiff was dismissed on the point of limitation. The appellant is the legal representative of original plaintiff Reshmoo, who had died during the pendency of the appeal before the Additional District Judge. In the later part of the judgment this Court will refer Reshmoo as plaintiff.