The petitioner filed this P.P.23/1998 against the respondent U/Sec.27 of Consumer Protection Act., sought for the relief of punishment for non-compliance of the orders passed in C.C.136/1997.   In this case, NBW’s are pending against the respondent since long time and police could not execute NBW’s.  After taking several adjournments, ultimately the Sub Divisional Police officer, Palamaner Incharge Madanapalli returned the warrant along with original death certificate of Bingi Sriramayya Chetty, the respondent in this case, stating that the respondent died on 21.07.2009 and the same has been registered in the Births & Deaths register on 23.07.2009 and requested to take further action in this case. The Death certificate of the respondent i.e., Bingi Sriramayya Chetty clearly shows that the respondent died on 21.07.2009 at Vivekananda Nagar, Madanapalli.  There upon a notice was issued to the petitioner two times and those notices were returned stating as addressee left.  As such the petitioner could not attend before this Forum to hear the petitioner in this case.  In view of the death of the respondent, this Forum relied upon a decision Ashok Kumar Appellant Vs. Dayanand Singh Respondent reported in II (2014) CPJ 131 (UT Chd) it was held in para no.9 “once the judgement debtor died, all his personal liabilities extinguished and the same could not be enforced against his legal heirs, by subjecting them to punishment of undergoing imprisonment”.  In the instant case, the P.P. 23/1998 is filed U/Sec.27 of C.P.Act seeking punishment for non-compliance of the orders passed in C.C.136/1997.  The facts in the said decision and the facts in this case are similar and that the said decision is applicable to this case because in the instant case, the original judgement debtor i.e., the respondent died and that all his personal liabilities could not be enforced against his legal heirs by giving punishment of undergoing imprisonment for non-compliance of the order passed in C.C.136/1997.  Further though notices were issued to the petitioner, he could not attend before this Forum and could not show any interest to take further steps.  In view of the above reasons and the death of the respondent, it is just and necessary to abate the case against the respondent and to close the P.P.  Accordingly the case against the respondent is abated and the P.P. is closed.