Substitution of heirs and correcting party records in appeal proceedings are essential to maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER

22 10-02-2026 Re: I.A. No. 8 of 2022 The present interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the appellants under Order XXII Rule 4(i) of the Code of Civil Procedure for substituting the names of the heirs of respondent no. 1(b), namely, Chotan Rai, respondent no. 8, namely, Ram Nandan Rai as well as respondent no. 9, namely, Sita Ram Rai.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that earlier the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 05.07.2018, whereafter a restoration application being M.J.C. No. 2514 of 2018 was filed. During the pendency of the said M.J.C., respondent nos. 8 and 9 have died on 23.01.2021 and 30.01.2021 respectively and a petition for substitution of their heirs was filed in the said M.J.C., which were allowed vide order dated 29.09.2021 in I.A. No. 04 of 2021. Consequently, the present appeal was restored to its original file and number on 28.06.2022.

3. It is further submitted that, inadvertently, no substitution petition was filed with respect to respondent no. 1(b), Chotan Rai, though he had died on 26.12.2019, leaving behind his heirs and legal representatives as mentioned in paragraph no. 2 of I.A. No. 8 of 2022. It is also admitted that the present application has been filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation.

Re: I.A. No. 9 of 2022

4. The present interlocutory application has been filed for setting aside abatement and for condonation of delay in filing the petition for setting aside abatement, restricted only to respondent no.

1(b), namely, Chotan Rai.

5. It is submitted that due to inadvertence on the part of the appellants, the necessary interlocutory application on behalf of respondent no. 1(b) could not be filed earlier in M.J.C. No. 2514 of

2018.

6. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the heirs of respondent no. 1(b) raised no objection to the prayers made for substitution, setting aside abatement and condonation of delay.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and the averments made in the applications, I.A. Nos. 8 of 2022 and 9 of 2022 are allowed after setting aside abatement and condoning the delay in filing the petition for setting aside abatement against respondent no. 1(b).

8. Office is directed to delete the name of respondent no.

1(b) and substitute the names of his heirs in his place.

9. So far deceased respondent nos. 8 and 9 is concerned, they were already substituted in restoration proceedings (MJC No. 2514 of 2018). However, there is settled principle, once substitution is effected in connected restoration proceedings and the appeal is restored, such appeal shall proceed against the substituted heirs as well. There is no need of further substitution of heirs of deceased in the restored appeal.

10. Therefore, office is directed to incorporate the names of the heirs of respondent nos. 8 and 9 whose details are mentioned in I.A. No. 04 of 2021 filed in M.J.C. No. 2514 of 2018.

Re: I.A. No. 13 of 2024

11. This application has been filed under Order XXII Rule

3(i) of the Code of Civil Procedure for deleting the name of appellant no. 1(i), namely, Panna Devi @ Panno Devi, widow of Balasdeo Rai, who died on 06.06.2023 during the pendency of I.A. No. 10 of 2022. It is stated that her heirs are already on record as appellant nos. 1(ii)

to 1(vii).

12. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and the averments made in the application, the prayer made therein is allowed.

13. I.A. No.13 of 2024 stands allowed.

14. Office is directed to delete the name of appellant no.

1(i) and substitute the names of her heirs, namely, three sons and three daughters, as mentioned in paragraph no. 3 of I.A. No. 13 of

2024.

Re: I.A. No. 10 of 2022

15. The present interlocutor