Vasdev Saran (Decd.) & Ors. vs Chander Wati Devi
2013 Latest Caselaw 751 Del

*             IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                 R.S.A. NO.157/2001

                                             Date of Decision : 14.2.2013

VASDEV SARAN (DECD.) & ORS.     ...... Appellants
            Through: Mr.Udit Gupta for Mr.B.C.Pandey, Adv.

                       Versus

CHANDER WATI DEVI                      ...... Respondent
            Through:             Mr. Prag Chawla, Adv.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI

V.K. SHALI, J. (ORAL)

1. This is a regular second appeal which was withdrawn and this fact

is recorded in the order dated 12.5.2009.

2. CM no.468/2002, is an application for cross objections filed by the

respondent and the same was pending.

3. My learned Predecessor had framed a substantial question of law

on 20.3.2012 which reads as under:-

"Whether the finding of the learned sub-Judge, Delhi and learned lower appellate court in holding the deceased Vas Dev Saran, being represented through LRs a tenant of suit property is perverse? "

4. Thereafter, no sincere effort was made by the learned counsel for

the respondent/objector to address the Court on this substantial

question of law.

5. Today Mr.Chawla, learned counsel for the respondent has stated

that the respondent /objector had sold the suit property to some

third party. He was asked to inform about the date on which the

interest in the suit property was transferred in favour of the third

party, whereupon he sought a pass over in the forenoon. It is

already 3.45 pm, he has not responded despite three calls in the

afternoon. Accordingly, order is passed.

6. Since there is a categorical statement made by Mr.Chawla, learned

counsel for the respondent that the interest in the suit property has

been transferred in favour of third party, Order 22 Rule 10 CPC

comes into operation, which reads as under:-

"10. Procedure in case of assignment before final order in suit. (1) In other cases of an assignment, creation or devolution of any interest during the pendency of a suit, the suit may, by leave of the Court, be continued by or against the person to or upon whom such interest has come or devolved."

7. There is no application filed on behalf of the person on whom the

interest in respect of the suit property has been assigned, created or

devolved nor is the date given as to when the said interest has been

created.

8. Accordingly, in my considered opinion, the present cross

objections have to be dismissed in default.

9. File be consigned to the record room.

V.K. SHALI, J.

February 14, 2013 RN