ORDER

Re:-I.A. No. 02 of 2020

This interlocutory application has been filed under Order XXII Rule-3, 4, 9 and 10(a) & Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 27.02.2020 for substituting the name of the heirs of deceased-appellants and deceased-respondents whose details are given in this application and also for setting aside the abatement and condonation of delay in filing the setting aside abatement by filing I.A. No. 03 of 2020, which has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

2. It is submitted that Appellant No. 1g, namely, Most. Makhia Devi died in the year, 2001 leaving behind her three sons namely, Sheo Tahal Tanti, Baldeo Tanti and Ganesh Tanti and three daughters, namely, Rampari Devi, Maina Devi and Chinma Devi. The heirs of deceased-appellant no. 1g are already on the record as appellant No. 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e and 1f respectively and, therefore, her name may be deleted from the memo of appeal.

3. It is further stated that Appellant No. 2, namely, Most. Rohani Devi also died in the year, 2001, leaving behind her three sons, namely, Bharosi Tanti, Ramdhani Tanti and Brahmdeo Tanti, who are already on record as appellant Nos. 3, 4 and 5 and, therefore, her name may also be deleted from the memo of appeal.

4. It is further stated that appellant No. 07, namely, Most. Balya @ Most Balia Devi died issueless in the year, 2007 and Appellant No.8, namely, Most. Manakwa Devi @ Mosomat Manaky Devi died in the year 2005 leaving behind her sole heir namely, Babulal Tanti, therefore, the names of the deceased appellant nos. 7 & 8 may be deleted from the memo of appeal and the sole heir of Most. Manakwa Devi @ Mosomat Manaky Devi be substituted.

5. It is further stated that appellant No. 09, namely, Meghan Tanti died in the year 2009 leaving behind his two sons, namely, Naresh Tanti and Botal Tanti. Therefore, the name of the appellant no. 09 be deleted from the memo of appeal and the name of the heirs of appellant no. 09 be substituted in his place.

6. It is further stated that appellant No. 10, namely, Ramchandra Tanti died issueless in the year 2011, therefore, his name be deleted from the memo of appeal.

7. It is stated that appellant No.11, namely, Smt. Kalbatya Devi went to Haryana in the year, 2006, and the deponent came to know that she has died there issueless in January 2020, therefore, her name may be deleted from the memo of appeal.

8. It is further stated that the deponent learnt from neighbours of respondent 1st party that respondent No. 1g namely, Hiralal Sao, respondent No. 1h namely, Ahilya Devi, respondent No.3 namely, Salendra Kumar Sao, respondent No.5 namely, Bilayati Devi and respondent No.7 namely, Smt. Keshari Devi have died during the pendency of this appeal. The aforesaid deceased respondents are close relatives of respondent No. 1a to 1f, 1i, 1j, 2(a) to 2 (e) and respondent No.4. It is further submitted that the deponent had gone to Sikandra Bazar on 12.01.2020 and met with the aforesaid relatives and enquired about the date of death and legal heirs of respondent No. 1g, 1h, 3, 5 and 7 but they refused to give the details regarding them.

9. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent 1st set may be directed to supply their date of deaths and names of their heirs with address.

10. It is further stated that respondent No.8, namely, Bhukhan Gope had died in the year 2014 leaving behind his sole son Ramdhani Gope but he refused to give date of death of his father, therefore, his name may be deleted and his heirs may be substituted in his place.

11. It is further stated that respondent No.10 namely, Garib Yadav had died in the year 2008 leaving behind his two sons, namely, Ganesh Yadav and Mahesh Yadav. Sri Ganesh Yadav refused to give date of death of his father and, therefore, his name may be deleted from the memo of appeal and the name of his heirs be substituted in his place.

12. It is further mentioned that respondent No. 13, namely, Ramrup Gope had