01.05.2025 Ct. no.655 Sl. No. 19 Nandita <,,,,,, SA 78 of 2007 With CAN 3 of 2025 Smt. Kalwant Kaur & Ors. Vs. Smt. Chapala Mallick (Since deceased) & Ors. ,,, Mr. Kushal Chatterjee, Mr. Oishik Chatterjee, ….for the Respondents In Re: CAN 3 of 2025 1. This instant appeal is filed at the behest of the appellants challenging the impugned judgment and decree dated 28.04.2006 and 15.05.20026 passed by the first Appellate Court in connection with Title Appeal No. 134 of 2003 thereby affirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Court dated 27.08.2003 in connection with Title Suit No, 89 of 2007. 2. It is said that during the pendency of this appeal the appellant nos. 1 and 2 were expired but the heirs/legal representatives of those appellants were not substituted within the period of limitation as prescribed in the Act. 3. It is further said that the respondent no. 1 died and his heirs/legal representatives are already on 2 record as it is revealed from the order dated 21.10.2009. It is further said that the respondent no.2, Sri Salil Mallick was expired on 29th May, 2015 and the respondent no. 3, Sri Samir Mallick was also expired on 30th January, 2001 but their heirs/legal representatives were not brought on record in place and stead of those deceased respondents. 4. A letter was sent by the learned Advocate for the respondent no.4 addressing to the learned Advocate for the appellant intimating the deaths of the respondents and reply to that a letter dated 10.02.2025 was sent to the learned Advocate on records stating that the appellant no. 3 Mr. Sarbajit Singh was passed away on 19th March, 2009. 5. Despite death of the appellants no(s). 1 and 2 and respondent no(s). 2 and 3 no steps have been taken on behalf of the appellant. It is said by the learned Advocate for the respondent no. 4 that as the heirs/legal representatives of the deceased parties to the case have not been brought on record within the prescribed period as provided in the Act, the instant appeal may be abated as a whole. 3 6. The suit was instituted with a prayer for eviction against the appellants and these appellants are tenants in common and, therefore, upon the death of the two appellants, the other appellant cannot survive the instant appeal and/or continue with this appeal. The appellant no. 1 and 2 have already expired as stated above as well as the respondent no. 2 and 3 have been expired and their heirs/legal representatives were not brought on record in place and stead of them. It cannot be disputed that there is automatic abatement if the application is not moved within the period of limitation. 7. So, in view of the above facts and circumstances the instant appeal stands abated as a whole against all the appellants. 8. Accordingly, the application being CAN 3 of 2025 is allowed. 9. The appeal being no. SA 78 of 2007 is dismissed as abated. 10. Let a copy of this order along with the Trial Court Records be sent down to the Trial Court immediately. < (Prasenjit Biswas, J.)