Per Mr.P.N. Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

1.         Heard Adv. Mr.S.S. Jinsiwale for appellant and Mr Rajesh Mantri representative for respondent for deciding the Miscellaneous Application dtd.28.04.2010 and another application dtd.18.12.2010 both have been filed to bring the legal heirs of deceased respondent on record. These two applications have been filed very belatedly. One is filed in April, 2010 and another is filed in December, 2010. The only respondent – Mrs Pushpa Mantri died on 05.12.2000.  These two applications for bringing legal heirs on record filed in April 2010 and in December 2010 respectively.  So there is a delay of more than 9 years in filing these applications. One of the applications is filed for setting aside the abatement of appeal and second is for brining the legal heirs on record.

2.         What is pertinent to note is that the respondent’s legal heir Mr Rajesh M Mantri had way back on 10.10.2003 sent one application in this Commission by post and giving the copy of the same to the clerk of MSEB, Islampur on 15.10.2003.  There is a signature of the clerk as having received the said application from Mr Rajesh M Mantri and it is also bearing stamp of MSEB, Islampur.  So by 15.10.2003 the appellant herein was knowing that the original respondent was expired on 05.12.2000. From that day till April 2010 in one application and till December 2010 in another application the appellant had not initiated any step to bring the legal heirs on record.  So obviously, these two applications are of no use for the appellant to seek setting aside the abatement of the appeal and for bringing the legal heirs of deceased on record.

3.         It is to be noted that under the Order XXII Rule10-A the duty is cast upon the counsels appearing for the either parties to inform the court about the death of the client.  So that other party can be directed to take effective steps to bring legal heirs on record.  However, this provision cannot be invoked for the benefit of the appellant herein for the simple reason that respondent’s representative Mr. R R Mantri had way back in 2003, informed the appellant  that his mother had died on 05.12.2000. This intimation was given to the appellant’s office at Islampur on 15.10.2003, copy of which was also sent to this Commission by Registered Post, as is cleared from the acknowledgement receipt, placed on record.

4.         Under these circumstances, it was the duty of appellant, when they learnt about the death of respondent in 2003, to take the steps to bring the legal heirs on record immediately. But they have filed these two applications belatedly.  Hence, these applications are absolutely barred by limitation and as such these two applications cannot be allowed to bring legal heirs of deceased respondent on record.

5.         Adv. Mr. Jinsiwale is relying on the judgment reported in AIR 1983 Supreme Court – 1202 – Gangadhar Vs. Raj Kumar.  The facts of the said case are different and the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court is not applicable to the present case. 

            Hence, the order:-    

                                    O R D E R

1.         Both the applications are dismissed. 

2.         Appeal stands abated.

3.         Copies of the order be supplied to the parties.

            Pronounced on 21.03.2011