Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.

Respondent No.12 is duly served, however, there is no appearance on their behalf, hence proceeded against exparte.

2. In this appeal, an application registered as CMP No.8 of 2018 has been filed under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for deletion of the name of respondent No.10, who has expired on 22.2.2013 i.e. during the pendency of the appeal in the lower appellate Court. The application is supported by death certificate Annexure A-1. The record available, at this stage, reveals that deceased respondent No.10 (defendant No.11 in the trial Court) has not only contested the suit but also the appeal in learned lower appellate Court. The appeal, however, came to be decided without taking note of her death and substitution of her legal representatives as well as deciding the question of abatement of the proceedings, if any.

3. As a matter of fact, on the death of respondent-defendant Sheela Devi and for want of requisite steps, the appeal before learned lower appellate Court stood abated automatically, however, only qua deceased respondent or as a whole, is a question which could have been considered and adjudicated by that very Court. Anyhow, the factum of death