CR 92 of 2002. 13.8.2008 Present: Mr. G.D.Verma, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. B.C.Verma, counsel for the petitioners. None for the respondents. Actual date notices were issued to the respondents, but nobody appears on their behalf. This revision is, therefore, being heard in their absence. The petitioners who are the appellants before the learned appellate Court are aggrieved by the order passed by the learned District Judge on an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure disallowing the prayer of the appellants that the name of respondent No. 15(d) Kala who died during the pendency of the appeal be deleted from the array of respondents. The learned Court, on consideration of the application, dismissed it basically on technical grounds. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the record. I cannot persuade myself to accept the reasoning of the learned appellate Court. To say that his approach is hyper technical would be stating the obvious. In case the appellant wanted deletion of the name of respondent No. 15(d) Kala, who according to them was already represented by other respondents, it -2- was for the appellants to decide whether to continue with the appeal in the absence of any other person who may or may not be her legal heir(s) or in her absence. The effect of such deletion could be adjudicated by the Court at the time of final hearing of the appeal on consideration as to whether the appeal was properly constituted or not. Dismissing the application basically on the ground that Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure was not attracted and it was Order 22 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure which was required to be invoked and that non impleadment of respondent 15(d) resulted in abatement was not correct. There is no finding that deletion of her name would result in conflicting decrees etc. This revision petition is accordingly allowed. The order of the learned District Judge is quashed and set aside. Name of respondent No. 15(d) is directed to be deleted from the array of respondents. The appeal will be taken up by the learned District Judge on 17.9.2008, where after notices of the appeal will be sent to the respondents and the appeal disposed of in accordance with law. The records be sent back immediately. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of. August 13, 2008 (PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.