(1.) THIS is a revision application Under sec. 26 of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act against an appellate order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner, Rajasthan, dated 26. 11. 1953 in a case relating to entries in the parcha chakbandi.
(2.) WE have heard the parties and have gone through the record as well. In view of the fact that a mandatory provision of law not complied with before the lower appellate court the case will have to go back to it for a re-hearing. The appeal was filed before the lower appellate court by the opposite-party and Krishna Ballabh, the deceased father of the applicant, was impleaded as a respondent in that appeal. It is an admitted fact that Krishna Ballabh had died during the pendency of the appeal before the commencement of the hearing, though the opposite-party took no steps whatsoever to bring the legal representative of the deceased Krishna Bullabh on record and yet the appeal was decided by the learned Additional Com-missiner exparte. As laid down in order 22 rule 4 C. P. C. where a sole-respondent dies the court is bound to cause the legal representative of the deceased respondent to be made a party to the appeal. It has been argued on behalf of the opposite-party that it had no knowledge of Krishna Bullabh's death. This cannot negative the mandatory provisions of law on the subject though it may provide a good ground for not moving the court to bring his legal representative on record and may be a sufficient cause for not moving that application in time. A. I. R. 1953 Punjab 252 may be cited as an authority for this proposition. WE would, therefore, allow this revision, set aside the order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner and remand the case back to it with the direction that the appeal filed before him be re-admitted, the appellants be allowed an opportunity to bring the legal representatives of the deceased respondent on record and the appeal be heard thereafter and disposed of in accordance with law. .