SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(Ori) 35

S.C.MOHAPATRA
KRUSHNA CHANDRA NAYAK – Appellant
Versus
NISAMANI BEWA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.N.MISHRA, B.N.MISHRA, B.Routray, J.P.MISHRA, L.MOHAPATRA, MANOJ MISHRA, P.K.MISHRA, R.K.MOHAPATRA, U.C.Panda

S. C. MOHAPATRA, J.


( 1 ) THE original respondent having died, the appellants applied for substitution of Smt. Premalata Mohanty and Smt. Snehalata Mohanty as her legal representatives. Admittedly, they are the daughters of the deceased son of the sister of late Bhikari Charan Mohanty, the husband of the respondent. In other words, they are the heirs of the husband of the deceased respondent. This application was registered as Misc. Case No. 294 of 1984. The application was objected to by one Brundaban Mohanty, who is brother's son of the deceased respondent. By order dt. 22nd April, 1985, the application for substitution was allowed subject to the objection of Brundaban to be delved into at the Final hearing of the Second Appeal.

( 2 ) DURING hearing of the Second Appeal an application for compromise under O. 23, R. 3, Civil P. C. was filed by the appellants and the substituted legal representatives of the deceased respondent. Since recording of the compromise would depend upon the validity of the substituted respondents being the legal representatives of the deceased respondent, the said question is taken up first.

( 3 ) ADMITTEDLY, the dispute in this Second Appeal relates to










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top