Supreme Court of India

SATE OF HARYANAversusTRILOK CHAND AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: 1995 INSC 865
Decided: 8 December 1995
Disposal: Dismissed
Bench: K RAMASWAMYB L HANSARIA

Holding

The appeals were dismissed and abated because the respondent’s legal representative was not brought on record and the award was common and indivisible.

Summary

The State of Haryana appealed against an award granted in a dispute with Trilok Chand and others. The High Court had earlier ordered the parties to bring their legal representatives on record within a specified period. The appellant failed to comply with this direction, and no steps were taken to record the legal representative of respondent No. 2. The Court observed that because the award was common and indivisible, the failure of one respondent to be represented necessitated the abatement of the entire appeal. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as against respondent No. 2 and, by operation of law, as against all parties. No costs were awarded.

Issues considered

Whether an appeal can proceed against a respondent who has not been represented by a legal representative on record as directed by the Court.
Effect of a common and indivisible award on the abatement of appeals when one party's appeal is dismissed.

Subjects

appeallegal representativeabated appealcommon awardindivisible awardprocedural lawcivil appellate jurisdiction

Judgment

                       SATE OF HARYANA                                        A
                               v.
                TRILOK CHAND AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

                           DECEMBER 8, 1995

             (K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.]                            B

       Practice and procedure :

       Appeah~ubstitutiott-Failure to take steps for-Effect of


       Dismissing the appeals filed by the State Government, this Court
                                                                              c
      HELD : Appeals stand dismissed as against respondent No. 2 as no
steps have been taken to bring his legal representative on record. The
award being common and indivisible, appeals stand abated as against all.
                                                                   [359-GJ    D
      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 11843-49
of 1995.

     From the Judgment and Order dated 4.2.85 of the Punjab & Haryana
High Court in R.F.A. Nos. 3-07, 333, 506-07 and 085 of 1984.                  E
       Ms. Indu Malhotra for the Appellant.

       G.K. Bansal for the Respondents.

       The following Order of the Court was delivered :
                                                                              F
       Leave granted.

      In view of the order passed by this Court giving peremptory time to
bring the Legal Representatives on record within six weeks from July 28,
1995, no steps have been taken. As a result, the appeals as against respon-   G
dent No. 2 stand dismissed without any further reference to the Court.
Since the appeals have been dismissed against one of them and the award
being common and indivisible, the appeals stand abated as against all. The
appeals are dismissed. No costs.

R.P.                                                   Appeals dismissed.     H
                                   359

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "appeal"Sign in to search