JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. - The appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 13.7.2018 by Virender Speya, the defendant whereby the suit filed by Man Chand, the plaintiff (since dead) has been decreed against him. 2. The appeal, after its admission is at the stage of final hearing, however, now it transpired that Man Chand, the plaintiff has already expired during the pendency of the suit before learned. Single Judge. Consequently, the appellant defendant has filed an application registered as CMP(M) No. 23 of 2019 with a prayer to delete his name from the array of parties, perhaps in view of the caveat filed by his legal representatives and they are duly represented. No such relief, however, can be granted because the plaintiff Man Chand was no more in the land of living on the day when the arguments in the suit were heard and the judgment pronounced. 3. As a matter of fact, the factum of death of plaintiff Man Chand went unnoticed and learned Single Judge has decided the suit without substitution of his legal representatives and deciding the question of abatement of the suit. On the death of a party to the suit or appeal and for want of consequential steps, suit/appeal abates because abatement is automatic. In view of the law laid down by this Court, as and when the question of abatement of the suit or appeal arises, the same can only be gone into and decided by the Court where the suit or appeal was pending at the time of death of a party. It has been held so by this Court in Jaswant Singh vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, (2015) 2 Shim. L.C. 674 while placing reliance on the ratio of the judgments rendered by this Court in Jagan Nath and others vs. Ishwari Devi, (1988) 2 Shim.L.C. 273 and Karam Chand and others vs. Bakshi Ram and others, (2002) 1 Shim.L.C. 9 . 4. Not only this, but the apex Court in a recent judgment in, Gurnam Singh (dead) by legal representatives and others vs. Gurbachan Kaur (dead), (2017) 13 SCC 414 by legal representatives, has reiterated the legal principles already settled further by holding that a decision in favour and/or against a dead person renders such decision nullity. 4. Not only this, but the apex Court in a recent judgment in, Gurnam Singh (dead) by legal representatives and others vs. Gurbachan Kaur (dead), (2017) 13 SCC 414 by legal representatives, has reiterated the legal principles already settled further by holding that a decision in favour and/or against a dead person renders such decision 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 can be challenged at any time including at its execution stage. This judgment reads as follows: (15) The question, therefore, is whether the impugned