Court should expressly exempt plaintiff to proceed with suit against non contesting deft

Sushil K. Chakravarty v. Tej Properties (P) Ltd., (2013) 9 SCC 642
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Or. 22 R. 4(4) and Or. 9 R. 13 - Death of sole defendant during pendency of suit - Exempting plaintiff from the necessity
of impleading legal representatives of sole defendant - When permissible - Need for conscious decision by court to grant
such exemption to plaintiff upon satisfaction that parameters specified under Or. 22 R. 4(4) were fully met - Held,
satisfaction of court that conditions under Or. 22 R. 4(4) are complied with, is mandatory before proceeding with suit
without impleading legal representatives of defendant, who having filed written statement has failed to appear and
contest the suit thereafter
- Express exemption from impleading legal representatives of deceased defendant, whether to
be granted by court before proceeding with the case - On facts, trial court permitted suit to proceed ex parte only after
plaintiff (respondent T herein) filed IA bringing death of defendant S (represented by appellants herein) to the notice of
court and for proceeding with suit ex parte - Further, defendant S having entered appearance in suit by filing written
statement, stopped appearing and was not represented through counsel - Despite ex parte order being passed during his
lifetime, S had not made any efforts for being permitted to contest/recall of ex parte order till his death - In the fact
situation, trial court had consciously and mindfully allowed suit to proceed further as against interests of defendant S,
without first requiring plaintiff (respondent herein) to implead legal representatives of deceased defendant - Hence, held,
decision by trial court in proceeding with suit ex parte was permissible, as against sole defendant without impleading his
legal representatives in his place, (2013) 9 SCC 642-

Print Page