Hence, present Second Appeal.

2 Heard learned Advocate Mr. Y.G. Somani for appellants. In view of Ashok Rangnath Magar vs. Shrikant Govindrao Sangvikar , (2015) 16 SCC 763 , it is not necessary that the respondent should be heard at the time of admission of the Second Appeal. If the substantial questions of law are arising and they are framed, then only the respondents are required to be called upon by issuing notice.

3 It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the appellants that during the pendency of the appeal one of the appellants viz. Uttam Appa Lalzare expired on 27.06.2020. This fact was informed to the Advocate of the appellants, however, the learned Advocate for the appellants failed to inform the Court and failed to bring the legal heirs on record. Though there were latches on the part of the Advocate but the First Appellate Court had passed decree against a dead person and, therefore, it is nullity. On this point also substantial question of law is arising. Further, both the Courts below failed to appreciate, though there was a compromise, none of the parties had acted upon it and when the suit was barred by limitation, the plaintiff could not have sought eviction o