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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3184

PATNA HIGH COURT
KHATIM REZA, J
Bibi Rehana & Ors. – Appellant
Versus
Md. Sahabuddin And Ors – Respondent
SECOND APPEAL No.128 of 1994



Advocates:
For the Appellant/s: Mr. Rajive Ranjan Singh
For the Respondent/s: Mr.Ambrish Kumar Jha

The court allowed the substitution of deceased respondent's heirs and condoned delay in filing the application based on satisfactory explanation.

Headnote:This judgment addresses applications under Order XXII of the CPC including I.A. No. 03 of 2024 for substituting the deceased Respondent No. 1, and I.A. No. 04 of 2024 for condoning delay in filing substitution petition. The Court found the explanation by the appellants for delay satisfactory and allowed the applications. The names of the heirs are to be substituted accordingly. The final ruling permitted the substitution of parties.

Table of Content
1. substitution of deceased respondent's heirs allowed. (Para 1 , 6)
2. court condoned delay and permitted substitution. (Para 7 , 8)
3. notice of appeal accepted by deceased respondent's heirs. (Para 9)

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER

30 19-01-2026 Re: I.A. No. 03 of 2024, I.A. No. 04 of 2024 & I.A.

No. 05 of 2025 I.A. No. 03 of 2024 This interlocutory application filed on behalf of the appellants under Order XXII Rule 4 of the CPC for substituting the name of Respondent No. 1, namely Md. Sahabuddin, who died on 05.12.2023 leaving behind his heirs and legal representatives, whose details are set out in paragraph 1 of the interlocutory application.

I.A. No. 05 of 2025

2. This application has been filed under Order XXII Rule 9 of the CPC for setting aside abatement against Respondent No. 1.

I.A. No. 04 of 2024

3. This application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing the application for setting aside abatement against Respondent No.

1.

4. Further, a supplementary affidavit has been filed in continuation of I.A. No. 03 of 2024 regarding the correct names of the heirs of the deceased Respondent No. 1. The correct names of the heirs are mentioned in paragraph 4 of the supplementary affidavit filed on 02.12.2025.

5. Learned counsel for the heirs of the deceased Respondent No. 1 appears through their counsel, but has not filed any reply or counter-affidavit to the aforesaid applications.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants were residing outside the State for the purposes of their livelihood and, therefore, were unaware about the death of Respondent No. 1. They came to know about the death of Respondent No. 1 only when they came to their native place.

Soon thereafter, the substitution petition was filed.

7.Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the explanation furnished in the limitation petition, I.A.

Nos. 03 of 2024 and 04 of 2024 are allowed, after setting aside abatement and condonation of delay.

8. Office is directed to delete the name of Respondent No. 1 from the Memo of Appeal and substitute the names of his heirs, as mentioned in paragraph 4 of the supplementary affidavit filed on 02.12.2025 in continuation of I.A. No. 03 of

2024.

9. Learned counsel for the heirs of the deceased Respondent No. 1 accepts appeal notice on their behalf.

(Khatim Reza, J)

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 Back to top