2025:HHC:1859 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. RSA No. 68 of 2024 Decided on: 8.1.2025 Naval Kishore Gupta ...Appellant. Versus Salinder Singh & others ...Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the appellants: Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Somesh Raj, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 and 2. None for respondents No. 3, 4, 6(i) to 6(iv), 7(i), 7(ii), 8(i) to 8(iv) and 9 to 11. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) The appellants have preferred the present Regular Second Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 30.12.2023, passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘First Appellate Court’), in Civil Appeal No. 37-P/XII/2023/2014, titled as ‘Naval Kishore Gupta versus Salinder Singh & others’, whereby, the learned First Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal, preferred by the appellants 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2025:HHC:1859 against the judgment and decree dated 26.2.2014, passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., in Civil Suit No. 74/90, titled as ‘Salinder Singh Narang & anr. Vs. Naval Kishore Gupta & others.’ 2. By way of the applications, bearing No. CMP(M) Nos. 15 and 16 of 2025, moved under Order 22 Rules 4 CPC, and Section 5 of the Limitation Act, indulgence of this Court has been sought for bringing on record the LRs of respondent No. 5, Ajudhya, who died on 5.8.2023, after condoning the delay and setting aside the abatement, if any. 3. It is not in dispute that the death of Ajudhya respondent No. 5, had taken place on 5.8.2023, when the lis was pending before the learned First Appellate Court. Moreover, the matter has been decided against a dead person, as, no efforts have been made to bring on record the LRs of respondent No. 5 Ajudhya. 4. Decree passed by the Court, for or against a dead person, is nullity. The Hon’ble Apex Court in ‘Gurnam Singh (Dead) through Legal Representatives & Others versus Gurbachan Kaur (Dead) by Legal Representatives’ (2017) 13 SCC 414, has observed, in para No.21, as under:- 2 2025:HHC:1859 “It is a fundamental principle of law laid down by this Court in Kiran Singh’s case (supra) that a decree passed by the Court, if it is a nullity, its validity can be questioned in any proceeding including in execution proceedings or even in collateral proceedings whenever such decree is sought to be enforced by the decree holder. The reason is that the defect of this nature affects the very authority of the Court in passing such decree and goes to the root of the case. This principle, in our considered opinion, squarely applies to this case because it is a settled principle of law that the decree passed by a Court for or against a dead person is a ‘nullity’.” 5. In view of the above, this Court has left with no option, but to set aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned First Appellate Court, and to remand the matter back to the learned trial Court for fresh disposal, in accordance with law. 6. With these observations, CMP(M) Nos. 15 and 16 of 2024 are disposed of. 7. Consequently, the present appeal is also disposed of by setting aside the judgment and decree dated 30.12.2023, passed by the learned First Appellate Court. 8. Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the learned First Appellate Court on 17.1.2025. 3 2025:HHC:1859 9. Since, the lis is pending between the parties from the year 1998, as such, it is expected from learned First Appellate Court to decide the matter afresh, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months, from the date of receipt of the record. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 11. Record be sent back immediately. ( Virender Singh ) Judge January 8, 2025 (kalpana) 4