IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.352 of 2008 1. RADHA NAND SINGH 2. Ramanand Singh 3. Shyamanand Singh Son of Late Bindeshwari Singh All are resident of village Mauja balbhadra Patti, P.S. – Uchakagaon, District – Gopalganj. ------------ Plaintiffs- Appellants-Appellants Versus 1. AKHILESH SINGH, son of Late Ramjeet Singh 2. Dharammire Devi 3. Sushila Devi Both daughter of late Ramjeet Singh Resident of village Mauja Balbhadra Patti, P.O. + P.S. – Uchakagaon, District – Gopalganj. --------- Defendant-Respondents-Respondent 1st set. 4. Janardan Singh, son of Late Fagu Singh 5. Ram Kumari Devi, Daughter of Late Fagu Singh 6. Dinanath Singh, son of Deoraj Mahto 7. Indira Shani Devi, Daugher of late Deoraj Mahto 8. Saniya Devi, Daugher of late Deoraj Mahto 9. Chandrama Singh, son of Arbind Singh 10. Punita Kunwar, wife of Arbind Singh 11. Amaresh Singh, son of Rajendra Singh 12. Kamlesh Singh, son of Rajendra Singh 13. Mithilesh Singh, son of Rajendra Singh 14. Manju Kumari, daughter of Rajendra Singh 15. Saraswati Devi, wife of late Rajendra Singh. All resident of village Mauja Balbhadra Patti, P.O. + P.S. – Uchakagaon, District – Gopalganj. --------- Defendants/Respondents-Respondents. 16. Harendra Singh, son of late Kisundeo Singh 17. Phulbari Devi, daughter of late Kisundeo Singh 18. Kanti Devi, daughter of late Kisundeo Singh 19. Ganesh Singh, son of late Mannua Singh 20. Ram Chandra Singh, son of late Mannua Singh All resident of village Mauja Balbhadra Patti, P.O. + P.S. – Uchakagaon, District – Gopalganj. 21. Tarendra Singh, son of late Genda Singh 22. Raj Kishore Singh, son of late Genda Singh 23. Suraj Singh, son of late Genda Singh 24. Basmati Devi, daughter of late Genda Singh 25. Rajmati Devi, daughter of late Genda Singh 26. Tajmati Devi, daughter of late Genda Singh 27. Munshi Singh, son of late Hardeo Singh 28. Manish Singh, son of late Hardeo Singh 29. Malik Singh, son of late Hardeo Singh 30. Suresh Singh, son of late Sarjug Singh - 2 - 31. Ram Naresh Singh, son of late Ramdhari Singh 32. Raj Ballabh Singh, son of late Ramdhari Singh 33. Lal Pati Devi, Daughter of late Tukans 34. Parmati Devi, Daughter of late Tukans 35. Chanmati Devi, Daughter of late Tukans 36. Ram Dhayan Singh, son of Bhukhal Singh 37. Ram Ekbal Singh, son of Bhukhal Singh 38. Inda Devi, Daughter of Bhukhal Singh 39. Simrikha Devi, Daughter of Bhukhal Singh 40. Chandrawati Devi, Daughter of Bhukhal Singh 41. Subhawati Devi, Daughter of Bhukhal Singh 42. Babita Devi, Daughter of Bhukhal Singh 43. Most. Sudamiya Devi, wife of late Jang Bahadur Singh 44. Ramesh Singh, son of late Jang Bahadur Singh 45. Dharmendra Singh, son of late Jang Bahadur Singh 46. Jitendra Singh, son of late Jang Bahadur Singh 47. Santosh Singh, son of late Jang Bahadur Singh 48. Rita Devi, Daughter of late Jang Bahadur Singh 49. Sita Devi, Daughter of late Jang Bahadur Singh 50. Renu Kumari, minor daughter of late Jang Bahadur Singh under the guardianship of Sudamia Devi, mother and guardian. All resident of village Mauja Balbhadra Patti, P.O. + P.S. – Uchakagaon, District – Gopalganj. ------------Defendant-Respondent-Respondent. ******* For the appellants : Mr. S.S. Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ranjan Kumar Dubey, Adv. Sushri Sangeeta Sharma, Adv. For respondent nos. : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Adv. 10,11,12,16,19,20 ******* 05. 08.07.2010 Heard learned counsels representing the appellant and respondents in this appeal. They are in agreement in getting this appeal disposed of at the admission stage itself. This appeal has been preferred against order of the court below declaring Title Appeal no. 11/2005 abated due to death of respondent no.2 which took place on 21.10.2007. None of the learned counsels was in position to make this court aware whether the deceased respondent - 3 - had entered into appearance in suit and contested the same by filing written statement or entered into appearance in appeal. So that it could be seen whether the provision as laid down under Order XXII Rule 10-A of the Civil Procedure Code which read as such applicable or not. “Order XXII Rule 10-A: Duty of pleader to communicate to Court death of a party – Whenever a pleader appearing for a party to the suit comes to know of the death of that party, he shall inform the Court about it, and the Court shall thereupon give notice of such death to the other party, and, for this purpose, the contract between the pleader and the deceased party shall be deemed to subsist.” However, this may be admitted position that after the death of the deceased respondent on 14.02.2008 by one of the surviving respondents, intimation was given regarding his death to the court, soon thereafter on 01.03.2008, the appellant filed application for substitution of legal heirs of deceased respondent no. 2. Simultaneously, the heirs also entered into appearance by filing petition to this effect. It is also pertinent to mention that besides the petition seeking substitution of heirs of respondent no.2, the appellant filed two more petitions one for setting aside abatement and another for condonation of delay at least - 4 - second petition was uncalled for. The court below by a detailed order discussing the plea of illness etc. taken on behalf of the appellant, causing delay of some days in filing the petition for substitution of heirs of respondent no.2 declared the appeal abated. After some argument, members of the Bar are in agreement that if a sum of Rs. 1000/- is paid to the contesting respondents by the appellant, the suffering caused to them due to delay of around a month in filing of substitution petition may be compensated. Thus, the appeal stands allowed, impugned order is set aside, case is remitted to the lower appellate court for hearing and disposal of appeal on merit. The appellant is directed to make payment of Rs. 1000/- to the contesting respondents within a month on production of the certified copy of this order or communication about this order to the court below. At the end, I failed to restrain myself in directing the court below to proceed expeditiously and preferably disposed of within 4 months the appeal which as submitted has already been amalgamated with another two connected title appeals, so that by early disposal at a time, pendency of three appeals may be reduced. Rajeev/ (Akhilesh Chandra, J.)