In Brief
In this property dispute, a trial court dismissed a plaintiff's suit for ownership and eviction against two defendant-brothers. The appellate court reversed and decreed in the plaintiff's favor, declaring the defendants to be tenants. During the second appeal before the High Court, one defendant (Ram Babu) died. His legal representatives were never substituted. The High Court declared the entire appeal abated. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, holding that because the defendants jointly defended on common grounds claiming joint ownership through their father, the decree was indivisible. Allowing the surviving defendant's appeal to proceed would create conflicting decrees. The Court clarified that Order XLI Rule 4 CPC does not override abatement rules when all defendants jointly appeal and one dies without substitution.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.