LAWS(HPH)-2019-6-39

BAKSHI RAM AND OTHERS Vs. KARAM CHAND

Decided On June 21, 2019
Bakshi Ram And Others Appellant
V/S
KARAM CHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order passed by the learned first appellate Court on 07.09.2018 whereby he allowed CMA No.235 of 2001 and held that the appeal did not abate as a whole or in part because of non-impleadment of all the legal heirs of S/Sh.Pohlo Ram, Om Parkash and Rup Lal and non-impleadment of of all the legal heirs of Shri Ishwar Dass.

(2.) The appellants/plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from interfering with the bartandari rights of grazing and cutting grass etc. on the suit land and other tikadarans of Tikka Paplah and the same had been decreed by the learned trial Court vide its judgment dated 7.4.1994. The appeal against the said judgment was dismissed by learned District Judge, Hamirpur vide judgment and decree dated 1.4.2000 in Civil Appeal No. 58 of 1994 titled Karam Chand vs. Bakshi Ram. However, because of the death of Pohlo Ram, who had died during the pendency of the appeal before the learned District Judge on 17.8.1996 the matter was remanded for considering the question of abatement by this Court in RSA No. 294 of 2000, decided on 16.7.2001. By a further judgment dated 26.2.2002 the question of abatement on account of death of Rup Lal was also left to be determined by the learned District Judge. The learned District Judge vide judgment and decree dated 21.5.2003 allowed the appeal and consequently the judgment and decree passed by learned trial Court was ordered to be setaside.

(3.) Before the learned District Judge, a prayer was made by the appellants that the name of Pohlo Ram, appellant No.18, Rup Lal, appellant No.5 and Om Parkash, appellant No. 24 be deleted and they were accordingly ordered to be deleted by an order dated 21.4.2003. The question of abatement on account of death of Pohlo Ram was not decided, whereas the main appeal came to be allowed on 21.4.2003. Earlier to that Smt.Devku, respondent No.4 before the learned District Judge had also died on 9.2.2002.