KAN SINGH, J.—The second appeal before me was lodged by four appellants Nathu, Ramdeo, Gokul and Hira on 5-4-71. During the pendency of the appeal Nathu one of the appellants, expired and learned counsel for the respondent moved an application for holding that the entire appeal has abated, as the appellant Nathu was survived by two female heirs who had not been brought on record within the period of limitation. Learned counsel maintains that as Nathu was one of the appellants and the decree against all the appellants proceeded on a ground common to all, the appeal abates in its entirety.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants contested this position. It was, however, admitted by him that Nathu had expired in February, 1972 and he had left behind two female heirs who were not brought on record within the period of limitation. Learned counsel, however, submits that according to the latest pronouncements of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Ratanlal vs. (Firm) Lalmandas(l) and Mahabir Prasad vs. Jageram (2), the last mentioned case being followed by this Court in Hanuman vs. Shakru (3), the appeal cannot be said to have abated and could be prosecuted by the surviving appellants ev

Click Here to Read the rest of this document