BHAIYA SARJU SINGH Vs. BHAIYA SURESH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Interlocutory Applications are for substituting the legal representatives of deceased appellant No. 1 after deleting his name, and for condoning the delay in making the application, after setting aside the abatement, if any.

(2.) APPELLANT No. 1 is said to have died on 18.8.1996, The application for substitution (at flag -A) was filed on 24.1.2003, i.e, more than six years after the death of appellant No. 1. Obviously, the petitioners herein cannot take the plea that they were not aware of the death of their father. Hence, they have pleaded the other alternative, that they were not aware of the pendency of the Appeal. We are bound to look at the reason given, with some skepticism.

(3.) BE that as it may, the instant Appeal is against a preliminary decree for partition arid is pending for quite some time before this Court. In the circumstances, we are not satisfied that it would be just and proper to dismiss the Appeal as abated as against the legal representatives of deceased appellant No. 1. Making a liberal approach in this context, we find that sufficient cause has been made out by the petitioners herein for condoning the delay; but at the same time we fed that the petitioners should be put on terms for their absence of course in not taking step for a quite long time.