Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 51 (PAT)

Ramjee Mishra v. Nil

2002-01-11

RADHA MOHAN PRASAD

body2002
Judgment 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the impugned order dated 30.7.1999 passed in Title Appeal No. 47/96 by the 6th Additional District Judge, Siwan. 2. The sole respondent Ram Swaro Kuer in the aforesaid appeal died on 14.7.1997. The appellants claiming to be the only heirs and legal representatives of the sole respondent sought for declaration of their right, title and possession over the suit land because even if they failed in succeeding in the appeal, they will inherit estate of Ram Swaro Kuer as legal heirs. On the contrary, Rameshwar Mishra and Uma Shanker Mishra had claimed that before the death of Ram Swaro Kuer, she had bequeathed her property to them through registered deed of gift dated 20.1.1997 and that they have been coming in possession of the property left by her. Rameshwar Mishra and Uma Shanker Mishra also filed application praying therein for substituting their names in place of sole respondent in the court below, namely, Ram Swaro Kuer. 3. The appellate court, vide impugned order, has disallowed both the applicationsone filed by the appellants and the other filed by Rameshwar Mishra and Uma Shanker Mishra and held that the appeal abated due to death of the sole respondent Ram Swaro Kuer and disposed it of accordingly. 4. In the present appeal filed by the appellants, none has been added as respondents. 5. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that the appellants being already on record in the appeal, the lower appellate court has erred in law in holding that the appeal abated due to death of the sole respondent. 6. This Court fails to appreciate the said submission of the learned counsel for the appellants. Besides that, this Court does not find any infirmity in the order that the appeal abated on account of non-filing of the petition at the appropriate time bringing it to the notice of the court. This Court also fails to appreciate as to how the appeal in the court below can survive in the absence of any contesting party after the death of the sole respondent. 7. Under such circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in this appeal and the same is, thus, dismissed.