1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO.612 of 2011 APPELLANTS :- (1) Arunturuti s/o Kishnan Subramaniyam Ori. Defts. since deceased thr. L.Rs. Smt. Padma Arunturuti Subramaniyam aged 62 years, Occ.: Nil, r/o S.N. Puran, Panangad, District Trichur, Kerala. (2) Keshao s/o Krushnarao Bokade aged 54 years, Occ.: Business, (3) Sahin s/o Keshao Bokade aged 54 years, Occ.: Business, Both r/o Near Binaki Power House, Binaki Mangalwari, Nagpur-17. ...VERSUS... RESPONDENT :- Smt. Anuradha w/o Prabhakar Borkar aged 46 years, Occ.: Household, r/o 10, Subhedar Layout, Nagpur. ------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.S. Mehadia Advocate for appellants. Mr. A.D. Dangore Advocate for respondent. ------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : A.B. CHAUDHARI,J. DATED : 30.11.2011 ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal was admitted on 26.9.2011. Mr.Dangore, learned counsel for the respondent submits by filing pursis St.No. 10020/11 mentioning therein that a ground has been raised in the appeal memo that original defendant no.1 Arunturuti s/o Krishnan Subramaniyam has expired on 30.5.2009 and the impugned judgment and decree 2 came to be passed on 29.1.2011 against him. In other words, the decree came to be passed against a dead person. To be precise, Mr.Dangore states that since the respondent did not know about the death of defendant no.1, no legal heirs could be brought on record nor the Court was informed about the death of defendant no.1 and that is why the decree came to be passed. Mr.Dangore agrees that decree against dead person would be nullity and, therefore, he has filed pursis under the signature of respondent for remanding the matter to the trial Court. Considering the above point, I think that interest of justice would be sub-served, if the following order is passed. ORDER (i) F.A. No. 612 of 2011 is partly allowed holding that the decree in question was passed against dead person. The judgment and decree dated 29.1.2011 in Special Civil Suit No. 753 of 2004 passed by Civil Judge, Sr.Dn., Nagpur, is therefore, set aside. (ii) Proceedings of Special Civil Suit No. 753/04 are remitted to the trial Court. (iii) Respondent may take steps, if permissible under law, after remand. The Court shall thereafter proceed to decide the matter. (iv) The trial Court shall dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, and in any case, within one year from the date of receipt of writ of this Court. JUDGE 3 /TA/