- (1.) PURSUANT to the order dated 18th April, 2007, the case is listed today.
(2.) BY the said order dated 18th April, 2007, service of notices on the defendants-appellants Nos. 1 to 5 to engage another Counsel consequent to the death of Sri Ashok Gupta, who had been appearing as the learned Counsel for the defendants-appellants, was deemed to be sufficient. As regards the defendant-appellant No. 6, the registered envelop wherein the said notice had been sent to the defendant- appellant No. 6 (Smt. Bhuri), was returned back unserved with the endorsement that the addressee (Smt. Bhuri) had already died. In the circumstances, the said order dated 18th April, 2007 directed the office to submit report as to whether any Substitution Application had been filed on behalf of the heirs and legal representatives of the defendant-appellant No. 6 for being substituted in place of the defendant-appellant No. 6. Pursuant to the said direction given in the order dated 18th April, 2007, the office has submitted its report dated 8th May, 2007. A perusal of the said report shows that no Substitution Application has been filed on behalf of the heirs and legal representatives of the defendant-appellant No. 6 for being substituted in place of the defendant-appellant No. 6.
(3.) IN the circumstances, the Second Appeal at the instance of the defendant-appellant No. 6 (Smt. Bhuri) stands abated. As the Second Appeal is an old one being of the year 1975, the Court is proceeding to pass order on merits of the Second Appeal keeping in view of the fact of abatement of the Second Appeal at the instance of the defendant-appellant No. 6 (Smt. Bhuri ).;