JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. - Cmp(M) No. 1055/18 in RSA No. 80/18 In compliance to the order passed on the previous date, this application has been filed for substitution of legal representatives of Sitara Begum, respondent No.2(d). She, however, has expired during the pendency of the appeal in the lower appellate Court. Another respondent 2(d), had also expired during the pendency of the appeal in the lower appellate Court and the appellants-applicants were exempted from substitution of her legal representatives vide order passed on 2nd August, 2017. However, her name also reflects in the impugned judgment and decree. As a matter of fact, the same should have been deleted. The trial Court record, as such, is defective. It has been held so by this Court in Jaswant Singh versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Others , (2015) 2 ShimLC 674 , while placing reliance on the ratio of the judgments rendered by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in Jagan Nath and Others v. Ishwari Devi , (1988) 2 ShimLC 273 and Karam Chand and Others v. Bakshi Ram and Others , (2002) 1 ShimLC 9 . 2. Not only this, but the apex Court in Gurnam Singh (dead) by legal representatives and Others versus Gurbachan Kaur (dead) by legal representatives , (2017) 13 SCC 414 , has reiterated the legal principles already settled further by holding that a decision in favour and/or against a dead person renders the same as nullity. The Apex Court has went one step further by holding that the decree passed without taking note of the death of a party to the lis or deciding the question of abatement and substitution of legal representatives could have been challenged at any time including at its execution stage. This judgment reads as follows: 15) The question, therefore, is whether the impugned