Back
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, Uday Kumar, JJ
Harendra Nath Das and others – Appellant
Versus
Surja Kr. Das and others – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. discussions on applications for substitution due to the demise of a respondent. (Para 3) |
| 2. court's observation on delay and condoning applications. (Para 4 , 5 , 10 , 15) |
| 3. implications of implicit prayers for condonation within substitution applications. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. conclusions regarding delay in filing applications. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. permission for further applications within the appeal process. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 17) |
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The application for substitution, bearing CAN 4 of
2025, has been filed for substitution of the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased respondent no.15.
3. CAN 3 of 2025 is an application for setting aside the abatement of the appeal.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the heirs of the respondent no. 15 and the respondent no. 16 contends that an application ought to have been filed for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal as well.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the application was filed within eighteen days from the date of knowledge of the demise of respondent no.
15.
6. Keeping in view the averments of the applications and the fact that the appellants came to know o
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
