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) 3208

PATNA HIGH COURT
HONOURABLE MR. KHATIM REZA, J
Abdulla Khan and Ors – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Bihar and Ors – Respondent
SECOND APPEAL No.23 of 2017



Advocates:
For the Appellant/s: Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s:

Heirs of deceased appellants may substitute in ongoing appeals under proper procedural compliance.

Headnote:The court analyzed an interlocutory application filed under Chapter VI Rule 4 of the Patna High Court Rules, 1916, seeking permission for heirs to prosecute the appeal following the death of the second appellant. The court considered the facts surrounding the filing of Title Appeal No. 03 of 2015/72 of 2014, which was pending judgment when the second appellant died. The court found justification for allowing the heirs to intervene as appellants based on substantial compliance with procedural requirements. The primary issue revolved around the substitution of deceased parties in ongoing litigation, with the court affirming the essential rights of the heirs. The outcome allowed the heirs of deceased appellants to replace them in the appeal as per I.A. No. 2081 of 2017.

Table of Content
1. addresses procedural compliance for substitution of heirs. (Para 5 , 6)
2. final orders issued regarding case processing. (Para 7)

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER

10 22-01-2026 Re: I.A. No. 2081 of 2017 This interlocutory application has been filed under Chapter VI Rule 4 of the Patna High Court Rules, 1916 for granting permission to the appellants to prosecute the appeal on behalf of the heirs of deceased appellant no. 2, who died during pendency of the Title Appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that Title Appeal No. 03 of 2015/72 of 2014 has been filed by the original appellant no. 2 and others before the Appellate Court. After completion of arguments, the said appeal was fixed “For Judgment” on 28.05.2016, in the meantime, appellant no. 2 died on 18.05.2016 and the appellant has named the heirs of appellant no. 2 in this appeal as appellant nos. 2 and 3 and seeks permission to proceed the case in their own names.

3. Considering the aforesaid facts and averments made in the interlocutory application, I.A. No. 2081 of 2017 is allowed.

4. Office is directed to accept the appellant nos. 2 and

3 as appellants in the memo of appeal.

Re: I.A. No. 03 of 2021

5. This interlocutory application has been filed for substituting the name of the heirs of deceased appellant no. 1, namely, Abdulla Khan, who died on 29.12.2019 leaving behind his heirs and legal representatives whose details are mentioned in paragraph no. 1 of the interlocutory application and also for setting aside abatement against appellant no. 1.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that a duly executed Vakalatnama of the heirs of deceased appellant no. 1 has already been filed.

7. Office is directed to verify and place the Vakalatnama of the heirs of deceased appellant no. 1 on record.

to file limitation petition for condoning the delay in filing the setting aside abatement against appellant no. 1 within two weeks.

directed to file hard copy of I.A. Nos. 02 of 2021, 03 of 2021 and 04 of 2021.

(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