Impleadment Of LRs In Appeal From An Interlocutory Order Will Enure Towards Suit Proceedings Itself: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that the impleadment of legal representative(s) by an Appellate Court in an appeal from an interlocutory order will enure towards the proceedings in the suit itself.

In this case, the plaintiff filed an injunction suit. His application seeking interim injunction was dismissed by the Trial Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the plaintiff died and the Appellate Court allowed the application to bring on record the legal representative. Later, the High Court, in the impugned order , held that the suit was abated as a result of the death of the only plaintiff, and it was not unsettled by bringing on record of the legal representatives in the suit within time. 

In appeal, the bench of Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy took note of the following observations made in Rangubai Kom Shankar Jagtap vs Sunderabai Bhratar Sakharam Jedhe [AIR 1965 SC 1794]

"(3) 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 therefore said that the fact that in the suit, the legal representative was not substituted would not result in abatement having regard to the declaration of the law made in this judgment.

"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 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. ", the bench observed while disposing the appeal and.

Case details

Maringmei Acham vs M Maringmei Khuripou | 2022 LiveLaw (SC)  958 | CA 8104 OF 2022 | 3 Nov 2022 | Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy 

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR Mr. Anand Nandan, Adv. Mr. Hassan Zubair Waris, Adv. Ms. Shivangi, Adv. Mr. Suchit Singh Rawat, Adv. Mr. Aakarsh, Adv. Mr. Bharat Singh, Adv. Mr. Ashish Pandey, Adv. Mr. Kshitiz Singh, Adv. Mr. Kushagra Raghuvanshi, Adv. Mr. Mahipal Khagnwal, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. N. Umakanta Singh, Adv. Mr. N G. Junior, Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gupta, AOR

Headnotes

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ; Order XXII Rule 2 - When 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 - Followed Rangubai Kom Shankar Jagtap vs Sunderabai Bhratar Sakharam Jedhe | AIR 1965 SC 1794. (Para 11-12)

Click here to Read/Download Order