IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No.252 of 2020 Decided on 20th August, 2025 Chet Ram and others …Petitioners Versus Panji Ram and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioners: Mr. Desh Raj Thakur, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioners/defendants have prayed for the following relief:- It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the present petition may be allowed and impugned order dated 10.01.2020 (Annexure P-11) passed by learned Senior Civil Judge Nahan, District Simour, H.P., in Civil Suit No.119/1 of 2010 and in CMA No.33/6 of 2020, CMA No.34/6 of 2020, CMA No.31/6 of 2020, CMA No.32/6 of 2020, titled as Chet Ram and others versus deceased Panji Ram and others versus Chet Ram and others and CMA No.38/6 of 2020 titled as Chet Ram and others versus Deceased Panji Ram and other whereby first six applications were allowed and last seventh application was dismissed may be quashed and set aside and the suit of respondents/plaintiffs may kindly be dismissed as abated or any other relief as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper keeping in view the facts and circumstances of present case and justice be done.” 2 2. In terms of Annexure P-11, after the remand of the matter by the learned 1st Appellate Court in the light of the fact that certain parties including two plaintiffs had died before the passing of the decree by the learned Trial Court itself, the learned Trial Court has passed orders on various applications which were before it to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased parties including the plaintiffs and the defendants. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that in the light of the fact that there was no cogent material placed on record by the plaintiffs to demonstrate as to why the abatement be set aside, the order under challenge is not sustainable. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the order under challenge is a self-speaking order and all aspects of the matter, which were there in the applications before the learned Trial Court, have been dealt with by the said Court. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the order under challenge. 5. It is not in dispute that the said order has been passed by the learned Trial Court after the matter was remanded 3 back to the said Court by the learned 1st Appellate Court when during the pendency of the appeal before the learned 1st Appellate Court, it was pointed out that certain parties were dead which included certain plaintiffs, who had died during the pendency of the Civil Suit. 6. Having perused the impugned order passed by the learned Trial Court, it cannot be said that the same has been passed by the learned Court without any due application of mind. In fact, each application has been separately dealt with and decided by the learned Trial Court by assigning reasons therein as to why the order so passed was being passed. Further, this Court also does not finds any perversity in the impugned order because, it is evident that the order besides being in conformity with the record, is also one which advances the cause of justice and thus, enable the parties to agitate the issue on merit before the learned Court. 7. Therefore, as this Court is of the considered view that there is no need for this Court to interfere with the order passed by the learned Trial Court in exercise of its power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this petition is disposed of without 4 interfering with the impugned order but with the observation that now an earnest endeavor be made by the learned Court below to be decide the suit from the stage it is before the learned Court after substituting the legal representatives of deceased parties as expeditiously as possible and preferably before 31.12.2025 as the learned counsel for parties inform the Court that only arguments are to be heard by the learned Trial Court. 8. Parties through counsel are directed to appear before the learned Trial Court on 22.09.2025. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge August 20, 2025 (Vinod)