GHULAM NABI BHAT Vs. GH NABI MIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An appeal came to be filed before this court against the judgment and decree passed by the court of 1st. Additional District Judge, Srinagar in a civil Suit No. 39, instituted on 25.8.1973 and decided on 30.4.1985. The suit was for partition, wherein the appellant has alleged that he alongwith defendants 1 to 3 who are respondents in the appeal have purchased properties jointly, situate at Maharaja Bazar, Srinagar, some twenty five years before the institution of the suit. The suit property was claimed by the appellant/plaintiff to be joint between the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3.

(2.) Respondents/defendants seem to have been served. They had appeared and filed their written statement, wherein they had pleaded that the suit property has been partitioned amongst the owners some fifteen years back and, es such, has stated that after the partition, the shops under-neath the building were given to each of the owners and they are exclusively recovering rent from their respective tenants and that the appellant/plaintiff has been given four rooms in one of the buildings and every sharer is in its respective possession of their share. The suit property need not to be partitioned again as same has already been partitioned. The contentions raised by the plaintiff are not correct.

(3.) Number of issues seem to have been framed and same were put to trial. The court after recording evidence and statements of the parties and perusal of the documents etc. and hearing the arguments had dismissed the sent of the plaintiff-appellant on 30.4.1985 and the suit of the plaintiff has been dismissed without any order as no costs. It is against this order/ judgment that he present appeal was filed be- fore this court. During tne pendency of this appeal, the sole appellant Ghulam Nabi Bhat is said to have died. Application for bringing on record legal representatives/successor ininterest has not been moved and it is the present application which is being disposed of oy this order, which seems, to have been moved by one Mushtaq Ahmad Bhat S. Ghulam Nabi Bhat R/O Maharaja Bazar, Srinagar praying for impleading him as appellant/plaintiff in place of his deceased father Ghulam Nabi Bhat. Further-more the applicant has prayed that in case there is any delay in making such application for impleadment, the application be treated as an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay, if any. This application has been listed and registered as CMP No. : (appeal) 271 of 1996 in Civil Appeal No. 49 of 1985.