SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Del) 254

P.K.PAHRI
THAKUR BIR RANDHIR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
THAKUR KARTAR SINGH (DECEASED) – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.R.MATTA, M.L.Lonial

Mr. P. K. Babri, J.

( 1 ) ONLY short point is involved in this appeal. I have heard the arguments and proceed to dispose of this appeal.

( 2 ) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 4/12/1989, byand Additional District Judge by which he had dismissed the applicationmoved by the appellant under Order XXII, Rule 4 read with Section 151 ofthe Code of Civil Procedure tor bringing on record legal representatives ofdeceased respondent-Kartar Singh. The application was dismissed as beingtime barred.

( 3 ) A suit was brought by the deceased-respondent for recovering ofpossession which was decreed vide judgment dated 29/05/1982. Theappellant had filed the appeal before the first appellate Court and on 9/08/1988, Counsel for the respondent informed the appellant that respondenthad died on 25/02/1988. An application for bringing on record thelegal representatives of deceased respondent was moved on 7/12/1988. In the application there were no facts mentioned which could entitlethe applicant-appellant to prove that there existed any sufficient cause forsetting aside of abatement of the appeal.

( 4 ) ARTICLE 120 of the Limitation Act lays down that the applicationfor bringing on record lega









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top