IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA

th

ON THE 20 OF JANUARY, 2026 FIRST APPEAL No. 266 of 2020 SRAVAN KUMAR (DELETED) AND OTHERS Versus SMT. PRABHAKANTA SHARMA AND OTHERS Appearance:

Mr. Himanshu Pathak - Advocate for appellants.

Mr. Divakar Vyas - Advocate for respondent No. 3.

Mr. Kabir Quraishi - Advocate for LRs. of respondent No. 6.

JUDGMENT This First Appeal under Section 96 of CPC has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 09/12/2019 passed by Third Additional District Judge, Guna, in R.C.S.A. No. 19A/2014, by which suit filed by appellant/plaintiff has been partially decreed, and it has been held that plaintiff is not entitled for specific performance of contract. However, it has been directed that defendant No. 2 Meena Sharma, defendant No. 3 Sandeep Sharma, and defendant No. 1 Prabhakant Sharma would refund an amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- to plaintiff, and plaintiff shall also be entitled for 6% interest on the amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- from the date of presentation of suit till the final payment is made.

2. I.A. No. 7387/2025 has been filed under Order 1 Rule 10, Order 41 Rule

21 and 23 r/w Order 22 CPC. This application has been filed on behalf of Madhur Bhargav for his impleadment on the ground that his mother Smt. Seema Sharma (Bhargav) was defendant No. 6, who committed suicide on 24/06/2005 along with her family members, but Madhur Bhargav/applicant survived. Neither the name of Smt. Seema Sharma (Bhargav) was deleted from the array of causetitle nor present applicant was substituted as legal representative of defendant No. 6 Smt. Seema Sharma (Bhargav). Thus, it is prayed that Madhur Bhargav be permitted to be impleaded in this appeal.

3. I.A. No. 6130/2025 has been filed under Order 22 Rule 4 r/w Order 22 Rule 11 of CPC on the ground that respondent No. 1 - Smt. Prabhakanta Sharma has expired, leaving behind her legal heirs defendants No. 2, 3, 4, 7, and 9, and therefore, it was prayed that the name of Smt. Prabhakanta Sharma, who expired on 16/05/2025, be deleted from the array of causetitle.

4. At the risk and cost of appellants, I.A. No. 6130/2025 is allowed, and the name of respondent No. 1 - Smt. Prabhakanta is permitted to be deleted from the array of cause-title.

5. Let necessary amendment be carried out within two weeks.

6. I.A. Nos. 8812/2025 and 210/2026 have been filed for urgent hearing.

Since both the applications, i.e., I.A. No. 6130/2025 and I.A. No. 7387/2025, have been taken up for consideration, therefore, I.A. Nos. 8812/2025 and 210/2026, which are the applications for urgent hearing, are dismissed as infructuous. 7. So far as I.A. No. 7387/2025 is concerned, it is the case of applicant that his mother Smt. Seema Sharma (Bhargav) had committed suicide on 24/06/2005, and applicant Madhur Bhargav had survived, but neither the name of his mother Smt. Seema Sharma (Bhargav) was deleted, nor the applicant was substituted as her legal representative.

8. Although applicant has not prayed for setting aside of the impugned judgment and decree on the ground of abatement, but before considering this application, this Court is of considered opinion that whether the civil suit filed by appellant had abated or not is required to be considered.

9. In the civil suit, appellant had pleaded that Pandit Brijnarayan Sharma was the husband of defendant No. 1 - Smt. Prabhakanta Sharma. Pandit Brijnarayan Sharma had already expired. He was blessed with two sons and four daughters from defendant No. 1 Smt. Prabhakanta Sharma. Defendant No. 3 - Sandeep Sharma is the son of late Pandit Brijnarayan Sharma. Elder son of Pandit Brijnarayan Sharma, namely Pradeep Sharma, had also expired, and defendant No. 2 - Meena Sharma is the widow of Pradeep Sharma, whereas defendants No. 4 to 7 are the daughters of late Pandit Brijnarayan Sharma. It is the case of appellant that after the death of Pandit Brijnarayan Sharma, his family, i.e., sons and daughters, remained a joint Hindu f