Smt. Sunita Devi vs Shakti Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 521 Jhar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           M.A. No. 419 of 2014
      1. Smt. Sunita Devi
      2. Ritika Kumari                            .... ....  Appellants
                         Versus
      1. Shakti Singh
      2. Kanhaiya Lal
      3. Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.
          Reliance Centre, Walchand Hirachand Marg, Mumbai
      4. Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.
          Next to Royal Industrial Estate, Mumbai .... .... Respondents
                                With

                           M.A. No. 363 of 2014
      Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Mumbai,
      through its Centre Manager, Ranchi       .... ....           Appellant
                         Versus
      1. Smt. Sunita Devi
      2. Ritika Kumari
      3. Smt. Veena Devi
      4. Shakti Singh
      5. Kanhaiya Lal                          .... ....             Respondents



CORAM :      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
                                  ------

For the Appellants : Mr. Arvind Kr. Lall, Advocate (In M.A. No. 419 of 2014) : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate (In M.A. No. 363 of 2014 For the Respondents : Mr. Shree Nivas Roy, Advocate ____ Oral Order 11 / Dated : 16.02.2022

I.A. No. 476 of 2022

Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant in I.A. No. 476 of 2022, which has been filed under order 22 Rule 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for substitution of respondent No. 6 namely Smt. Veena Devi who died on 15.05.2021.

It is submitted by learned counsel that respondent No. 6 was Proforma defendant who died on 15.05.2021 and the petition has been filed on 15.01.2022.

It is submitted by learned counsel that due to COVID Pandemic the petition for substitution could not be filed within time.

In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Suo Motu Writ Civil No. 03 of 2020 case the delay is condoned in filing the substitution petition.

Learned counsel on behalf of the respondent has raised no objection. Under the circumstance, the substitution petition is allowed. Let this case be listed after two weeks.

AKT                                            (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)