IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the liberal construction of 'sufficient cause' for condonation of delay and the emphasis on a satisfactory explanation, as outlined in the case of Perumon Bhagvathy Devaswom versus Bhargavi Amma (2008) 8 SCC 321.

JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, J.

The applicants have preferred the application under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC, for brining on record the LRs of deceased appellant No. 1(d), who, as per the application, died on 20.5.2016, leaving behind the legal representatives, whose names have been mentioned in para-2 of the application. The application has been moved on the ground that the appellants/applicants have filed the present appeal, before this Court, however, the same was dismissed in default, on 10.3.2023.

2. When, the process of moving the application for restoration of appeal, has been initiated, then, the counsel, representing the appellants came to know about the fact that appellant No. 1(d) Ishwar Dass had died on 20.5.2016.

3. Since, the application has been filed after the prescribed period of limitation, as such, by moving CMP(M) No. 1584 of 2023, a prayer has been made to condone the delay, on the ground that the applicants/appellants were never intimated by their counsel, nor they were aware about the same. They came to know about filing of the appeal, when they received the notice in the execution petition. Thereafter, they had contacted their counsel to know about the status of the appeal, then, they came to know about the dismissal of the appeal, in default.

4. According to the applicants, thereafter, the applicants have moved the application, on 7.8.2023, before the High Court Legal Service Authority, for appointment of Legal Aid Counsel. Consequently, on 18.9.2023, the Legal Aid Counsel was provided to them to defend their case. They contacted the Legal Aid Counsel, on 22.9.2023. Thereafter, the application was prepared and as such, a prayer has been made to condone the delay, mentioned in the application, as seven years, nine months and nine days.

5. This application has been contested by the non-applicants, on the ground that appellants Uma Devi and Ishwar Dass, expired on 10.3.2022. Thereafter, application bearing No. 4391 of 2022, was moved for early hearing of the appeal.

6. In the application, respondents have pointed out the factum of death of aforesaid person and also submitted that steps have not been taken for bringing on record their legal representatives.

7. Thereafter, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution, as no one had appeared.

8. On the basis of above facts, it has been pleaded that the appeal has been abated, as steps have also not been taken till 25.9.2023, for bringing on record the legal representatives of appellant No. 1(d), Ishwar Dass. On the same ground, the application under Order 22 Rule 3 CPC has also been contested.

9. Applicants have filed rejoinder denying the factual position, by virtue of which, the application has been contested.

10. Perusal of the record shows that the appeal was filed on 20.3.2010. The appeal was admitted on 15.7.2011. During pendency of the appeal, legal representatives of sole appellant were brought on record, as appellants No. 1(a) to 1(f), vide order dated 17.12.2014.

11. During the pendency of the appeal, respondents have preferred CMP No. 4391 of 2022, in which a prayer has been made for early disposal of the appeal, on the ground that the respondent Mohan Lal is 79 years old and is not keeping good health. When, the application was considered, then, the factum of death of appellants Uma Devi and Ishwar Dass, was noticed. On 23.4.2022, the following order was passed, by this Court, while disposing of CMP No. 4391 of 2022:

“Even though, this application has been filed by applicants/respondents No. 1 and 2 for early hearing of the appeal, however, it would be noticed that appellant No.1-Uma Devi and appellant No.4-Ishwar Dass have died and their legal representatives have not been brought on record and, according to the applicants/respondents N.1 and 2, the appeal has abated. The application is disposed of. The appellants are directed to take steps for brining on record the legal representatives of deceased-appellants Uma Devi and Ishwar Dass within four weeks. However, th