1 SA 779 & 781 of 1999 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Second Appeal No.779 of 1999 With Civil Application No.5739 of 1999 With Second Appeal No.781 of 1999 With Civil Application No.5740 of 1999 Rama s/o Dagadu Mirge Since deceased through legal representatives. .. Appellant. Versus Phulsing s/o Tikaram Meher And Another. .. Respondents. -------- Shri. K.C. Sant, Advocate, for appellant. Shri. A.D. Kasliwal, Advocate, for respondents. -------- CORAM: T.V. NALAWADE, J. DATE : 21st OCTOBER 2015 ORDER: 1) Learned counsel for the appellant seeks time as he submits that complete information is not given and so he could not file application but he is ready with the application which he wants to file for setting aside the abatement and for bringing legal representatives. 2 SA 779 & 781 of 1999 2) Learned counsel representing Fulsing, plaintiff in the suit for possession and the defendant in the suit for specific performance submits that, he had informed about the death on 20-4-2015. This fact is not disputed by the learned counsel. In view of provision of Order 22 Rule 10 of CPC (Bombay Amendment) the counsel is not bound to give particulars and the necessary particulars need to be collected by the appellant himself. There cannot be dispute over this proposition. 3) The appeals are disposed of as abated as there is deemed abatement. All the pending civil applications are disposed of. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated. Sd/- (T.V. NALAWADE, J. ) rsl