M/S Hotel Yatrik vs Employee State Insurance Co. & Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 1977 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

M/S Hotel Yatrik vs Employee State Insurance Co. & Ors on 24 January, 2025

Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
             M.A. No. 165 of 2013
M/s Hotel Yatrik, Tower Chouk, B. Deoghar through its Proprietor Shri Bhola
Prasad Sah.
                                                ....    ....    Appellant
                                     Versus
Employee State Insurance Co. & Ors.             ...       ....     Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Appellants              : Mr. Anil Kr Jha, Advocate
                                  Mr. Jayant Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Respondents            : Mr. Rajan Raj, Advocate
                                 Mr. Ashutosh Anand, Advocate
                           ------

Order No. 15 / Dated : 24.01.2025.

I.A. No. 6846 of 2021 & I.A. No. 6847 of 2021 Heard learned counsel in I.A. No. 6847 of 2021 which has been filed for substitution of the proprietor of the appellant-M/s Hotel Yatrik by their representative (namely Amit Kumar Sah and Vineet Kumar Sah) who died during the pendency of the appeal on 23.10.2020 and substitution petition has been filed after a delay of 216 days.

With regard to the delay in filing the substitution petition, it is submitted that the original appellant Bhola Prasad Sah died due to COVID-19 during the said period. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Khaitan Vs. ILFS Financial Services Ltd. (2023) SCC online SC 1241, as such, the said delay may be condoned.

Learned counsel on behalf of the insurance company raises no serious objection.

Considering the grounds taken in the aforesaid interlocutory application as the proposed legal heirs are necessary parties, as such, they are permitted to be substituted in place of the deceased Bhola Prasad Sah and the name of these substituted appellants will be reflected in the cause title of the memo of appeal.

Office to make necessary substitution by red ink in the cause title. Accordingly, both the interlocutory applications are allowed. Learned counsel M/s Jitendra Nath Upadhyay and Jayanta Sarngi submitted that they have not filed vakalatnama in this case. Therefore, their name be deleted from the cause list.

Office is directed to delete the name of learned counsel M/s Jitendra Nath Upadhyay and Jayanta Sarngi from the cause list.

List this case under the appropriate heading on 04.02.2025.

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Pawan/-