Research › Browse › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

1913 DIGILAW 232 (ALL)

Fazal Mohammad Khan v. Habibullah Khan

1913-06-20

KNOX

body1913
JUDGMENT : Knox, J. One Rahman Khan who was the defendant in the court of first instance, filed an appeal from the order of that court. 2. In that appeal he was the sole appellant. In the lower appellate court he failed and died before be could file an appeal from the appellate court's decree. His son, Fazal Mohammad Khan, has asked permission of this Court to file, an appeal from the lower appellate court's decree. On the 8th of January, 1913, this Court gave Fazal Mohammad Khan permission to file the appeal. An objection has, however, been raised to the effect that he is not the sole representative of the deceased Rahman Khan. Several persons claim to be representatives. Some of them state that they are no longer interested in the appeal inasmuch as Rahman Khan executed a will appointing Fazal Mohammad Khan as heir to the property in dispute. But there are certain others who claim to be legal representatives of Rahman Khan and who, apparently, dispute the will and consider that they ought to be parties to the present appeal. They have filed an objection to Fazal Mohammad Khan's application to appeal as legal representative of the deceased Rahman Khan. Looking to the words contained in Order 22, rule 3, 1 am of opinion that the court must cause all, who prove themselves to be legal representatives of a deceased, to be made parties, before it proceeds with the further hearing of the appeal. This view receives support from the case of Ghamandi Lal v. Amir Begum, [1894], I.L.R., 16 All., 211. There it is laid down that all legal representatives of a deceased appellant must be brought on the record as appellants, or if any had refused to be joined as appellants, they must be brought on as respondents. Fazal Mohammad Khan must comply with this order if he be in a position to do so. But I understand that Fazal Mohammad Khan is debarred by lapse of time from adopting this procedure. The result is that the appeal abates. As the respondents have been put to the expense of appearing, it is only just that they should get their costs and I decree that their cost must be paid by Fazal Mohammad Khan.