Rajkumar Soni vs Mirza Afzal Beg
2023 Latest Caselaw 212 Chatt

                                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                              Order Sheet

                                                   SA No. 139 of 2022

                                      Rajkumar Soni Versus Mirza Afzal Beg




11.01.2023         Shri Rama Kant Pandey, counsel for the Appellants.
                   Shri Tarkeshwar Nande, P.L. for the State/Respondent No.5.

Shri Pandey, counsel for the Appellants submits that earlier an application seeking leave to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment and decree was filed, however, he could not point out the said fact when the matter was listed on 08.12.2022. It is submitted by him that since the said application has already been filed along with the memo of appeal, therefore, the default(s), as pointed out based upon the said order dated 08.12.2022 may be ignored.

Considering the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the Appellants and considering further that the application for the said purpose has already been moved, the default(s), as pointed out by the Registry is hereby ignored.

Heard on I.A. No.01/2022, an application seeking leave to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment and decree dated 19.09.2019 passed in Civil Appeal No.58-A/2019.

Learned counsel appearing for the Appellants while furnishing the registered deed of sale dated 07.06.2014 submits that even prior to the institution of the suit, he purchased the same from Defendant No.3-Ghanshyam Soni, however, even without impleading him as party defendant, the said suit was filed and, contended further that although the suit was dismissed by the trial Court ,but in appeal, it was reversed by the appellate Court by virtue of the impugned judgment and decree, therefore, his valuable right is affected. Further contention of him is that the said Ghansyam Soni, who was impleaded as Defendant No.3, was died on 06.11.2016, even prior to pronouncement of the judgment and decree dated 30.11.2016 passed by the concerned trial Court even without the substitution of his legal representatives. He, therefore, submits that since his valuable right is affected owing to impugned judgment and decree as passed by the lower Appellate Court, therefore, he may be permitted to prefer this appeal.

On due consideration of the contents made in the application, considering the registered deed of sale dated 07.06.2014 and considering further that the said Defendant No.3-Ghanshyam Soni from whom the appellant has purchased the property in question was died prior to pronouncement of judgment by the trial Court, I am, therefore, inclined to allow the same.

The application is accordingly allowed and the appellant is hereby permitted to prefer this appeal.

I.A. No.01/2022 thus stands disposed of.

Also heard on I.A. No.02/2022, an application for condonation of delay of 87 days in filing this appeal.

Issue notice on this application to Respondents No.1 to 4(d), on payment of P.F., as per rules.

Post this matter after 5 weeks for consideration on I.A. No.02/2022.

Sd/-

(Sanjay S. Agrawal) JUDGE

vivek