Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Ram Gupta, son of Shri Kunj Behari Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Arjun Lal, son of Shri Gyarsi Lal Dhobi – Respondent
ORDER :
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.
1. The instant Civil Miscellaneous Application is preferred by the appellant-plaintiff for restoration of S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.76/2020 titled as ‘ Ram Gupta Vs. Arjun Lal ’ which was dismissed in abatement on 02.12.2024, after setting aside abatement.
2. By this order, we are also disposing of Application Nos.1/2025, 2/2025 and CMCC No.567/2025.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant- appellant-plaintiff has preferred a Second Appeal No.76/2020 after dismissal of First Appeal No.19/2007 on 21.10.2019 by learned Additional District Judge No.3, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur. He further submitted that initially, the present appellant-plaintiff has filed a suit for eviction, determination of standard rent and permanent injunction against tenant Arjun Lal (since deceased) on ground of default in payment of rent and personal and bona fide need but the suit was dismissed by the trial Court. He further submitted that the Appellate Court without considering the legal issues has also dismissed the first appeal under Section 96 of CPC. He further submitted that aggrieved from said judgment, he has preferred the second appeal which was pe
Counsel must notify the court of a party's death and provide legal heirs' details; failure leads to abatement under Order 22 Rule 10A of CPC.
The court affirmed the principle that procedural rules should receive liberal construction to ensure justice is served, specifically in applications for condonation of delay and substitution of legal....
(1) Substitution – Limitation – Suit/appeal automatically abates when application to substitute legal representatives of deceased party is not filed within prescribed limitation period of 90 days fro....
Abatement of an appeal under CPC is not automatic upon death if the right to sue survives; presence of a legal representative allows continuation despite procedural delays.
The main legal point established is that the timely filing of applications under Order XXII Rule 4 and Rule 9 of the CPC is crucial, and delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause. Negligence ....
Delay/Laches/ limitation - Sufficient cause – Meaning of - The expression ‘sufficient cause’ within the meaning of Section 5 of the Act or Order 22 Rule 9 of the Code or any other similar provision s....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
