IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 146 of 2006 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BRINGING HEIRS) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 146 of 2006 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2 of 2026 In CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BRINGING HEIRS) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 146 of 2006 ==========================================================

STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

Versus HEIRS OF DECD.PRAKASHSINH HEMANTSINH & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR CHIRAG UPADHYAY AGP for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3 RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1.3,1.4 UNSERVED EXPIRED (R) for the Respondent(s) No. 1.1,1.2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI Date : 11/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

Order in Civil Application No. 2 of 2026.

1. The Present Civil Application is filed for condonation of delay of 6232 days in filing the application for bringing legal heirs of deceased respondent No. 1.1 on record.

2. Heard learned AGP Mr. Chirag Upadhyay for the applicants and learned advocate Mr. Meet D Pansuria for the proposed heirs of deceased respondent No. 1.1.

3. Learned AGP for the applicants contended that, pending the Second Appeal, original respondent had passed away. Resultantly, his heir Mr. Hemantbhai Jivansinh Rathore was impleaded as respondent No. 1.1. The deceased respondent No. 1.1 did not appear in the proceedings and when the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court issued fresh Notice on 07.02.2023, the applicants got to know from the bailiff report that respondent No. 1.1 has expired on 22.09.2008. Thereafter, the applicants were in search of the details of the heirs of deceased respondent. The heirs of deceased respondent No. 1.1 approached the learned Mamlatdar for obtaining pedigree of deceased respondent No. 1.1 which was obtained on 29.07.2025. Upon such receipt of pedigree, the applicants got to know the details of the legal heirs of deceased respondent No. 1.1. It is contended that till date the applicants were not aware about the date of death and there was a clear violation of the provisions of Order 22 Rule 10A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("the Code" for short"). There is no lethargy on the part of the applicants. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the present application be allowed. Except above, no other submissions are made.

4. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Meet D Pansuria for the heirs of deceased respondent No. 1.1 could not contradict the aforesaid position. Except above, no other submissions are made.

5. Considering the averments made in the application and the submissions canvassed by learned advocate for the parties, sufficient cause is made out by the applicants. It appears from the submissions canvassed by learned AGP that the applicants were not aware about the death of deceased respondent No. 1.1. The Order 22, Rule 10(A) of the Code envisages duty of a pleader to communicate to the Court regarding death of a party. In the present case, the applicants were not made aware about the death of respondent No. 1.1. Moreover, deceased respondent No. 1.1 also did not appear in the proceedings.

6. Considering the facts, delay is required to be condoned in the interest of justice, and, resultantly, delay is condoned. The present Civil Application is allowed accordingly.

Order in Civil Application No. 1 of 2026.

The present Civil application is filed for bringing legal heirs of the deceased respondent. A copy of death certificate of deceased respondent is also placed on record. Considering the averments made in the application, application deserves to be allowed and the same is allowed accordingly. Necessary amendment to be carried out forthwith.

Order in Second Appeal No. 146 of 2006 Issue Notice to newly added parties, making it returnable on 18.03.2026. Learned advocate Mr. Meet D Pansuria waives service of notice on behalf of respondent herein.

(D. M. DESAI,J)

SHIVANI SHUKLA