IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SA No.384 of 1989 1. Jit Narayan Raut @ Jit Narayan Yadav, son of Late Mishri Raut. 2. Alakhdeo Narayan @ A.N. Yadav, son of Late Mishri Raut. 3. Anugrah Narayan , son of Late Mishri Raut. 4. Kismati Devi, widow of Late Mishri Raut. All residents of Village- Karsaut Tola, Bhoj Chapra, Police Station- Maharajganj, District- Siwan. 5. Sursati Devi, wife of Chiranjee Lal Yadav, resident of Village- Pokhar Bhinda, Post Office- Jogiya, Police Station- Ekma, District- Chapra. 6. Sundar Pati Devi, wife of Jammadar Prasad Yadav, resident of Village- Aagayan, Post Office- Muskabad, Police Station- Goriya Kothi, District- Siwan. 7. Genapati Devi, wife of Deonath Yadav, resident of Village- Teghara, Post Office- Teghara, Police Station- Maharajganj, District- Siwan. Serial Nos. 5 to 7 all daughters of Late Mishri Raut. All heirs and legal representatives of deceased plaintiff Mishri Raut(heirs of deceased plaintiff- appellant)......................Appellants. Versus ----------- 1. Chandradeo Raut, son of Khedan Rout. 2. Chuman Raut, son of Chandradeo Raut. 3. Shriram Raut, son of Chandradeo Raut. All residents of village- Karsaut Tola Bhoj Chapra, Police Station- Maharajganj at present-Daraunda, District- Siwan......................Defendants-Respondents- Respondents. ----------- For the appellants : M/s. Binod Kumar Singh and Bipin Kumar, Advocates. For the Respondents: None. ----------- 14. 27.07.2009. The heirs of deceased Mishri Rout who was the sole plaintiff of Title Suit No. 216 of 1974 and the sole appellant in Title Appeal No. 57 of 1983 have filed this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 9.6.1989 passed by Sri Ghanshyam Prasad, the erstwhile VIth Additional District Judge, Siwan. No one appears for the respondents today as was the situation on the two earlier dates also i.e., 20.07.2009 and 21.07.2009. This appeal has to be allowed and remitted back to the - 2 - lower appellate court on the sole ground that sole appellant of Title Appeal No. 57 of 1983 had died during the pendency of the appeal and although a substitution petition had been filed therein, the appeal was disposed of without disposing of the substitution petition prior to disposal of the appeal. The net result is that the judgment and decree has been passed against a dead person and therefore is a nullity. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court dated 9.6.1989 in Title Appeal No. 57 of 1983 is hereby set-aside. The matter is remitted back to the lower appellate court for fresh hearing after disposed of the substitution petition filed by the heirs of the deceased appellant Mishri Raut. U.K. (Abhijit Sinha,J)