Wednesday, 06, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Bansidhar, S/O Late Shri Balwant ... vs Bejnath S/O Late Shri Shivcharan
2022 Latest Caselaw 6898 Raj/2

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6898 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 31 October, 2022

Rajasthan High Court
Bansidhar, S/O Late Shri Balwant ... vs Bejnath S/O Late Shri Shivcharan on 31 October, 2022
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 205/2022

Bansidhar, S/o Late Shri Balwant Singh & Ors.
                                                       ----Appellants-plaintiffs
                                    Versus
Bejnath S/o Late Shri Shivcharan & Ors.
                                                 ----Respondents-defendants
For Appellant(s)          :     Mr. B.M. Singh
For Respondent(s)         :     None



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

                                     Order

31/10/2022

1. Appellants have moved applications (1/2022 and 2/2022)

stating inter alia that appellant No.4- Ram Kumar had died during

course of trial of suit on 28.4.2019 but this fact was not brought

on record during course of trial and his legal representatives were

not substituted. The suit has been dismissed on merits vide

impugned judgment dated 4.3.2022, therefore, application under

Order 22 Rule 3 CPC along with application seeking condonation of

delay and to set aside abatement had been filed.

2. It appears from record that civil suit for permanent

injunction was jointly instituted by four plaintiffs. Plaintiffs No.2, 3

and 4 namely Banwari Lal, Rameshwar and Ram Kumar are three

sons of plaintiff No.1-Banshidhar. Plaintiff No.4- Ram Kumar had

died. It may be noticed that even if legal representatives of Ram

Kumar were not substituted on record, the cause of action for suit

of permanent injunction continues and survives upon plaintiffs

No.1 to 3 who are entitled to continue the suit.

(2 of 2) [CFA-205/2022]

3. In view of such proposition, counsel for appellants has

prayed that if substitution of legal representatives of deceased

plaintiff No.4 Ram Kumar is not possible to be made in the present

appeal, his name may be deleted from the array of cause title.

4. Prayer is accepted.

5. Both applications stand disposed of in the manner that the

factum of death of appellant No.4, during course of trial, is taken

on record and his name is allowed to be deleted from the array of

cause title.

6. Counsel for appellants may file the amended cause title

within a period of two weeks.

7. List thereafter.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

NITIN/28

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter