: 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.197 OF 2009 Devji Keshavji Gala & Anr. ... Applicants V/s. Rajvi wd/o. Gopal R. Shetty & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.A.A. Kumbakoni a/w S.M. Suryawanshi for Applicants Mr.H.S.S.Murthy a/w V.K. Narkar for Respondent Nos.1A, 1B and 1D CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: JANUARY 12, 2010 P.C.: 1. The suit has been filed by the plaintiffs for a declaration that they are tenants of Defendant Nos.1 and 2. In the suit they have stated that they are conducting a business in the name and style of Shri Mahalaxmi Hindu Lodge & Hotel. It appears that Defendant No.1 died and therefore the trial Court passed an order that the suit had abated. Being aggrieved by that order of the trial Court, the plaintiffs moved the appellate Court contending that the suit had abated only against the defendant who had died and not against defendant No.2 who was alive. 2. The appellate Court upheld the contention of the plaintiffs and held that the suit had not abated but that in view of the death of defendant No.1 it had abated against him. : 2 : 3. In my opinion, the trial Court has committed no error by directing that the suit had not abated against defendant No.2. Hence, the civil revision application is dismissed. 4. However, the trial Court while deciding the suit will consider whether the plaintiffs can be granted any relief in the present circumstances qua defendant No.2.