Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010202132016 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) I.A.(Civil)/1505/2023 SRI SHIBU THAKUR S/O LATE JOTAI THAKUR R/O BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO. 2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM. VERSUS KANTI DEVI and ANR W/O SRI PREM THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM 2:ON THE DEATH OF DILIP THAKUR HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES/HEIRS 2.1:REEMA THAKUR W/O LATE DILIP THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM Page No.# 2/7 2.2:SUBHAM THAKUR S/O LATE DILIP THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM. BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER REEMA THAKUR.. 2.3:DEV THAKUR S/O LATE DILIP THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM. BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER REEMA THAKUR.. ------------ Advocate for : MR. N HAQUE Advocate for : appearing for KANTI DEVI and ANR I.A.(Civil)/1504/2023 SRI SHIBU THAKUR S/O LATE JOTAI THAKUR R/O BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO. 2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM. VERSUS KANTI DEVI and ANR W/O SRI PREM THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA Page No.# 3/7 ASSAM 2:ON THE DEATH OF DILIP THAKUR HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES/HEIRS 2.1:REEMA THAKUR W/O LATE DILIP THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM 2.2:SUBHAM THAKUR S/O LATE DILIP THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM. BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER REEMA THAKUR.. 2.3:DEV THAKUR S/O LATE DILIP THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM. BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER REEMA THAKUR.. ------------ Advocate for : MR. N HAQUE Advocate for : appearing for KANTI DEVI and ANR I.A.(Civil)/1506/2023 SRI SHIBU THAKUR S/O LATE JOTAI THAKUR R/O BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO. 2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD Page No.# 4/7 MOUZA GOBARDHANA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM. VERSUS KANTI DEVI and ANR W/O SRI PREM THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM 2:ON THE DEATH OF DILIP THAKUR HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES/HEIRS 2.1:REEMA THAKUR W/O LATE DILIP THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM 2.2:SUBHAM THAKUR S/O LATE DILIP THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM. BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER REEMA THAKUR.. 2.3:DEV THAKUR S/O LATE DILIP THAKUR RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD TOWN WARD NO.2 P.O. BARPETA ROAD MOUZA GOBARDHANA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM. BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER REEMA THAKUR. Page No.# 5/7 Advocate for the applicant(s): Mr. N Haque Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. SK Ghosh B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER 20.01.2025 Heard Mr. N Haque, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant. Mr. SK Ghosh, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.1. 2. All these three applications are taken up together for disposal by this common order. 3. IA(C)No.1504/2023 is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condoning the delay of 17 days in filing the application under Order XXII Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, the Code) for setting aside abatement. It is seen from the records that on 24.11.2022, the respondent No.2 had expired, which was informed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2 in terms with the provisions of Order XXII Rule 10(A) of the Code. Thereupon, the appellants collected the names of the legal representatives of the respondent No.2 on 09.05.2023. After the said steps were being taken the instant application was filed on 29.05.2023 and in that process there has been a delay which had occasioned. Page No.# 6/7 4. This Court upon perusing the grounds and also taking into account that the legal representatives have been duly served as would be seen from the affidavit of service is of the opinion that the instant application is required to be allowed thereby condoning the delay of 17 days in preferring the application under Order XXII Rule 9 of the Code for setting aside the abatement in so far as the respondent No.2 is concerned. 5. IA(C)No.1505/2023 is an application for setting aside the abatement in so far as the respondent No.2 is concerned. Taking into account the grounds and reasons shown and the fact that this Court had already condoned the delay in preferring the application for setting aside the abatement, it is the opinion of this Court that the instant application is required to be allowed for the ends of justice. Accordingly, the IA(C)No.1505/2023 is allowed. Consequently, the abatement in so far as the respondent No.2 is set aside. 6. IA(C)No.1506/2023 is an application for substitution of the legal representatives of the respondent No.2. It is seen that the right to sue continues against the legal representatives of the respondent No.2 and accordingly this Court substitutes the opposite party Nos. 2(a), 2(b) and 2(c) against the name of the respondent No.2. IA(C)1506/2023 accordingly stands allowed. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant is directed within 7(seven) days to file a fresh memo of parties before the Registry of this Court and the Registry shall on the basis of the said memo of parties make necessary corrections in the cause-title and update the same in the CIS. 8. With the above, all the three interlocutory applications stand disposed of. Page No.# 7/7 JUDGE Comparing Assistant