Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for VENIGALLA KOTESWARAMMA VS MALAMPATI SURYAMBA...
2021 0 Supreme(SC) 26 : According to Rule 4(1) of Order XXII of the Code, when one of several defendants dies and the right to sue does not survive against the surviving defendant or defendants alone, or when the sole defendant dies and the right to sue survives, the court shall cause the legal representative of the deceased defendant to be made a party upon application. If no such application is made within the time limited by law, the suit shall abate as against the deceased defendant. This rule applies to appeals by virtue of Rule 11, which extends the provisions of Order XXII to appeals, substituting ''''appellant'''' for ''''plaintiff'''', ''''respondent'''' for ''''defendant'''', and ''''appeal'''' for ''''suit''''.Checking relevance for Upper India Cable Company VS Bal Kishan...
1984 0 Supreme(SC) 71 : Under Order XXX, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, where two or more persons are sued in the name of a firm and any such person dies, it shall not be necessary to join the legal representatives of the deceased as a party to the suit. This applies even if the deceased was a proper party, particularly when no relief is claimed against them personally and the suit is against the firm. The death of a proper party does not cause the suit or appeal to abate, especially when the party against whom relief is sought (the firm) remains active and prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, legal representatives need not be made parties in such cases.Checking relevance for Shivshankara VS H. P. Vedavyasa Char...
2023 3 Supreme 228 : No, all legal representatives do not necessarily have to be made parties in the event of a party''''s death in a suit. If the estate or interest of the deceased party is fully and substantially represented by the surviving co-parties who are also legal representatives, the suit or appeal will not abate. This principle applies when the surviving parties jointly represent the deceased''''s interest, as seen in cases where the original defendants (sons of the deceased third defendant) continued to defend the suit and prosecute the appeal, thereby representing the joint interest. The courts have held that in such circumstances, the failure to implead all other legal heirs does not render the suit abated or invalid, as the estate is sufficiently represented. This is supported by decisions in Bhurey Khan v. Yaseen Khan and State of Andhra Pradesh v. Pratap Karan, which affirm that an appeal or suit does not abate merely due to non-substitution of all legal representatives when the interest is fully and substantially represented by the remaining parties.Checking relevance for Siravarapu Appa Rao VS Dokala Appa Rao...
2022 0 Supreme(SC) 1673 : The death of a party to a suit does not automatically require all legal representatives to be made parties. If the right to sue survives, the suit may proceed at the instance of the surviving party or parties. Under Order 22 Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, the court shall cause the legal representative of a deceased party to be made a party only if an application is made within the time limited by law. If no such application is made, the suit shall abate as against the deceased party. Thus, legal representatives are not automatically required to be made parties; their substitution depends on a formal application and the survival of the right to sue.Checking relevance for Om Prakash Gupta alias Lalloowa (Now Deceased) VS Satish Chandra (Now Deceased)...
2025 3 Supreme 79 : Yes, all legal representatives must be made parties in the event of the death of a party to a suit. According to Order XXII Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, when a party dies, the court must substitute the legal representatives of the deceased party in the suit. The law does not mandate that only the plaintiff must file the application for substitution; applications can also be made by the heirs or legal representatives of the deceased party. Once such an application is filed and the court is informed of the death and the identity of the legal representatives, the court is obligated to pass an order substituting them. This principle is supported by the Supreme Court''''s decision in Union of India vs. Ram Charan (AIR 1964 SC 215), which held that there is no legal requirement that substitution must be initiated only by the plaintiff, and that applications by heirs or legal representatives are legally permissible and valid. Therefore, the court must ensure that all legal representatives are brought on record to maintain the continuity of the suit.
