PRITAM SINGH Vs. RATTAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal arises out of the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, Una, dated 16th April, 2005.

(2.) IT is admitted position that respondent No. 6, Om Parkash, who is necessary party, expired when the proceedings were pending before the learned trial Court. The learned first appellate Court gave his judgment unmindful of the factum of the death of the respondent No. 6, who was defendant No. 6 before the trial Court. No steps were taken before the learned trial Court or the learned District Judge to substitute the legal representatives of defendant No. 6.

(3.) IT is well settled that where a party dies pending suit or appeal, and judgment/decree is passed in ignorance to such death, the question of substitution of heirs and setting aside the abatement, if any, can only be considered by the Court, before whom the suit or appeal as the case may be, was pending when defendant or respondent expired.