Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J
Sunaina Devi W/o Ajay Sinha – Appellant
Versus
Anand Kumar Modi S/o Late Ashok Kumar Modi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Prasant Pallav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Vishal Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for opposite party nos. 5 and 6 and Mr. Shresth Gautam along with Mr. Gaurav Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.8.
2. Office note suggests that notice upon opposite party no.3 has been received by sister-in-law, notice upon opposite party no.4 has been received by wife, notice upon opposite party no.7 is validly served. Thus, notices upon opposite party nos. 3, 4 and 7 are deemed to be validly served.
3. It has also been pointed out that opposite party nos.1 and 2 have left for their heavenly abode and I.A. No.6477 of 2023 has been filed for substitution of opposite party no.1 and for deletion of opposite party no.2.
4. Mr. Pallav, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that opposite party no.1, namely, Ashok Kumar Modi and opposite party no.2, namely, Parwati Devi died 2-3 years back, however, the petitioner was unaware of the death of opposite party nos. 1 and 2. He submits that in this petition, vide order dated 19.05.2023 notices were issued upon the opposite parties including opposite party nos. 1 and 2, who have left for their
Orders passed against deceased parties are nullities and require legal representation for validity.
A decree against a deceased party is void; however, the legal heirs have the discretion to treat it as valid or challenge it, as reaffirmed by the court.
An appeal filed against a deceased sole defendant is a nullity; proper procedure requires withdrawal of the appeal with liberty to file a fresh one involving the legal heirs.
The amendment to Order XXII Rule 4 of the CPC aims to ensure the continuation and culmination of effective adjudication and to prevent the proceedings from coming to an end summarily due to the death....
Orders against deceased parties are nullities; proper substitution of legal heirs is essential in ongoing litigation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory requirement for the court to determine the legal representative of a deceased party when a dispute arises, as per Order 22 Rule 5 of ....
Merely because the evidence of respondent/defendant and Prabhakar Rao (PW-2) was not repeated all over again, it cannot be held that the appellant/ plaintiff could be non-suited on this ground.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of substitution of legal representatives of deceased parties in civil proceedings and the consequences of non-substitution.
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
