AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 178 wordsSanjay Kumar, CJ
Mr. H. Donald, learned counsel, represents Mr. T. Rajendra, learned counsel, who had appeared for the deceased appellant.
As per the order dated 29.09.2022, Mr. T. Rajendra, learned counsel, had stated before this Court that the son of the deceased appellant took away the case record on 28.08.2022. The matter was adjourned on that day to enable the LRs of the deceased appellant to take appropriate measures. However, no steps have been taken till now.
Mr. H. Dijen, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent, would point out that he had informed this Court of the death of the sole appellant as long back as on 19.05.2022, though the actual date of his death is not known precisely.
The aforestated facts clearly demonstrate that the appeal stands abated as on date as no steps have been taken by the LRs of the deceased appellant despite ample opportunity being given to them.
RSA No. 7 of 2016 is accordingly dismissed as abated.
In consequence, MC(RSA) No. 5 of 2019 is also dismissed.
No order as to costs.