IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.2097 of 2008 VIJAY KUMAR JAMUAR Versus CHHATHU MAHTO & ORS ----------- 2. 17.12.2008 Heard Mr. Mahesh Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court the ultimate conclusion arrived by the court below in the impugned order could not in any way have affected the result even if the discussion in the earlier part of the order is sketchy and not in consonance with the principles of Order 22 Rule 4 C.P.C. The whole question was whether after the death of defendant no.2 right to sue for the plaintiff opposite party will survive or the suit could have abated due to no proper substitution of defendant no.2 who is said to have died on 2.10.1999. It is true that the suit itself was instituted in the year 2001 and therefore, the suit was filed against a dead person but then the relief which was prayed in the suit was that both defendant no.1 and defendant no.2 be permanently restrained by an order of permanent injunction from selling or 2 executing any type of document or creating any sort of trouble over any portion of the suit land. Obviously if the defendant no.2 was dead prior to filing of the suit, such relief had remained confined against defendant no.1. In that view of the matter, even if the heirs of defendant no.2 were not brought on record the suit could not have abated. If for the purpose of safety the plaintiff has brought the names of the heirs that again will not give any cause of action to defendant no.1, the petitioner of this civil revision application, because even thereafter the cause of action in the suit will remain confined only against defendant no.1. The plea which is now being taken by defendant no.1 that on account of addition of the heirs and the legal representatives of defendant no.2 disposal of the suit will get delayed has to be noted for its being rejected. It is the plaintiff’s suit of the year 2001 seeking injunction against defendant no.1 and if such suit continues it will not cause any prejudice to the petitioner. 3 That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and is dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/