JUDGMENT Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J —It is not in dispute that proforma respondent No.7 - Asha Devi died on 14.2.2010 when the proceedings were, in fact, pending before the trial court. It is also not in dispute that legal representatives were not brought on record either before the trial court or even before the first appellate court. Thus, the proceedings before the trial court itself had abated. Once that being so, obviously, the judgment and decree passed by the trial court against a dead person are nullity. 2. In addition to the aforesaid, it would be noticed that even though the name of Smt. Asha Devi had been ordered to be deleted from the array of respondents, yet the first appellate court allowed the appeal against all the respondents, including deceased Asha Devi. In such circumstances also the decree passed by the first appellate court is not sustainable in the eyes of law. 3. Now, the further question as to whether the appeal has abated as a whole or has partly abated against deceased Asha Devi is a question to be adjudicated upon by that court where the abatement has taken place. 4. It is settled law that as and when the question of abatement of suit or appeal arises, such question can only be gone into and decided by the Court where the suit or the appeal was pending at the time of death of a party. (Refer: 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 ) . 5. Equally, settled is the legal proposition that decree in favour or against a dead person is a nullity. (Refer: Kishun alias Ram Kishun (dead) through L.R.s versus Bihari (D) by L.R.s , (2005) AIR(Supreme Court) 3799) . 6. Consequently, the judgment and decree passed by the learned courts below being in favour or against a dead person are nullity, as such, the same are set aside. The case is remanded back to the learned trial court with a direction to allow the plaintiffs to take consequential steps for brining on record the legal representatives of deceased Asha Devi and thereafter decide the question of substitution of legal representatives as also the question of abatement of the appeal, if any, after affording the parties due opportunity of being heard. In case the suit is held to be maintainable then needless to say that the learned trial court shall decide the same afresh in accordance with law. 7. The parties through their counsel(s) are directed to appear before the learned trial court on 2.4.2018. 8. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. All pending applications also stand disposed of.