RAMA DEVI Vs. DHRUV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having regard to the nature of order this Court proposes to pass in the instant petition, there is no need to issue notice to the respondents, as it would unnecessarily burden them with the expenses of engaging services of a counsel to represent them in the instant proceedings.

(2.) Precisely the facts, as emerge from the record, are that the petitioner-plaintiff and respondents No. 11 to 13 (hereinafter, 'plaintiffs') filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the respondents-defendants (hereinafter, 'defendants') under S.26 CPC read with Ss. 34 and 38 of Specific Reliefs Act, praying therein for declaration that the plaintiffs are owner-in-possession of land denoted by Khata No. 69, Khatauni No. 116, Khasra Nos. 941, 942 and 943 Kita 3 area measuring 611-71 square metre situate at Chilgari, Tehsil Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh as per Jamabandi for the years 1999-2000 (hereinafter, 'suit land').

(3.) Vide judgment and decree dated 19.12.2011, passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kangra at Dharamshala, in Civil Suit No. 90/2004, suit having been filed by the plaintiffs came to be decreed. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with aforesaid judgment and decree passed by learned trial Court, defendants filed an appeal in the court of learned Additional District Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala i.e. Civil Appeal No. 10- D/2012. Learned first appellate Court, having taken note of the fact that defendant No.5 Asha Kumar had expired on 16.12.2011 i.e. during the pendency of trial, proceeded to remand the case back to learned trial Court, vide judgment dated 15.5.2019, with the direction to decide the issue of abatement and impleadment, if any, of legal representative of defendant No.5.