Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SARDAR AHAI versus TOTO RAM

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sardar Ahai v. Toto Ram - SECOND APPEAL No. 1745 of 1983 [2007] RD-AH 12740 (24 July 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon. S.P. Mehrotra, J.

Pursuant to the order dated 22.5.2007, the case is listed today.

Sri S.A.Azami, learned counsel for the defendants -appellants and S/Sri B.N.Agarwal and Sanjay Agarwal, learned counsel for the proposed heirs and legal representatives of the respondent no.1, are present.

Sri S.A. Azami submits that  the office report dated 17.4.2007 pertains to the respective  proposed heirs and legal representatives of the respondents nos. 2,3 and 5.

It is further submitted by Sri Azami that the proceedings before the Lower Appellate Court against the said respondents, proceeded ex-parte ,  and therefore, it appears that the  respective proposed heirs and legal representatives of the said respondents are not interested in appearing before this Court in the present Second Appeal , and in the circumstances, no steps are required to be taken for issuance of fresh  notices to the  respective proposed heirs and legal representatives of the said respondents, and the service of notice on the  respective  proposed heirs and legal representatives of the said respondents be deemed to be sufficient.

Sri Azami brings to the notice of the Court the following passage in the judgment and order dated 17.5.1981 passed by the lower Appellate Court :-

"Aggrieved by the said judgement and decree , the appellants have come up in appeal. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondent no.1. Other  respondents are ex-parte and none appeared on their behalf . I have seen the records. In my opinion , the appeal lacks merits."

       Sri B.N.Agarwal, learned counsel for the proposed heirs and legal representatives of the respondent no.1 does not contest the submissions made by Sri Azami in this regard.

In view of the above, service of notices on the respective  proposed heirs and legal representatives of the said respondents nos. 2,3 and 5 , as mentioned in the said office report dated 17.4.2007, is deemed to be sufficient.

Let  the applications , mentioned in the said office report dated 17.4.2007, be listed for orders on 7.8.2007.

In the meantime, Supplementary Rejoinder Affidavit , if any, on behalf of the defendants-appellants , may be filed.

dt. 24.7.2007

Second Appeal No. 1745 of 1983/aks.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.