Impleadment Of Legal Representative In Appeal From Interlocutory Order Will Enure Towards Proceedings In Suit Itself- SC

The Bench of Justice KM Joseph and Justice Hrishikesh Roy observed, "...in view of the fact that the legal representative has been brought on record in appeal though from an interlocutory order, such impleadment will enure towards the proceedings in the suit itself."

In this case, the temporary injunction sought by the Original Plaintiff was refused. Thereafter, an appeal was filed against the refusal to grant interlocutory order. The Original Plaintiff – Appellant's father had passed away during the pendency of the appeal and the legal representative came to be the son of the Original Plaintiff was brought on record in the appeal. The High Court had thereafter, in the impugned order observed that the suit was abated as the Original Plaintiff had died and it was not unsettled by bringing on record of the legal representatives within time.

AOR Amit Pawan appeared for the Appellant while AOR Neeraj Kumar Gupta appeared for the Respondent before the Court.

The Court placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rangubai Kom Shankar Jagtap v. Sunderabai Bhratar Sakharam Jedhe & Others [AIR 1965 SC 1794] wherein it was observed-

"An appeal was filed against an interlocutory order made in a suit. Pending the appeal the defendant died and his legal representatives were brought on record. The appeal was dismissed. The appeal being a continuation or a stage of the suit, the order bringing the legal representatives on record would enure for the subsequent stages of the suit. This would be so whether in the appeal the trial court's order was confirmed, modified or reversed."

The Court while noting so observed, "The fact that in the suit, the legal representative was not substituted would not result in the consequence which the High Court has found in the impugned order having regard to the declaration of the law made by this Court. In other words, in view of the fact that the legal representative has been brought on record in appeal though from an interlocutory order, such impleadment will enure towards the proceedings in the suit itself. To make it further clear, the failure to get the appellant impleaded in the suit itself would not be fatal to the continued prosecution of the suit."

The Court thus held that the suit, therefore, must be proceeded with and it cannot be extinguished by virtue of the abatement which the High Court attributes on account of the death of the sole plaintiff and non-impleadment in the suit of his legal representative.

Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the High Court, and directed the Civil Judge (Senior Division) to dispose of the cases within eight months.

Cause Title - Maringmei Acham v. M Maringmei Khuripou

Click here to read/download the Judgment