DHURANDHAR PRASAD SINGH versus JAI PRAKASH UNIVERSITY AND ORS.

DHURANDHAR PRASAD SINGH versus JAI PRAKASH UNIVERSITY AND ORS.

A decree passed against an original party without impleading a successor-in-interest due to devolution during pendency is not void ab initio; such omission does not render the decree nullity for purposes of execution under Section 47 CPC. The initial duty to seek leave to continue the suit lies upon the plaintiff, but any person interested may apply for leave to properly represent interests.

Parties
Appellant: Dhurandhar Prasad Singh; Respondents: Jai Prakash University and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 July 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court – Appeal Against High Court Revision Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Execution of Decrees, Devolution of Interest, Order 22 Rule 10 CPC, Section 47 CPC, Procedural Law
Civil Procedure Execution of Decrees Devolution of Interest Order 22 Rule 10 CPC Section 47 CPC Procedural Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dhurandhar Prasad Singh

Appellant

Jai Prakash University and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court – Appeal Against High Court Revision Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether, upon devolution of interest during pendency of suit, a decree passed without impleading the successor-in-interest is a nullity and can be executed against such person.
  2. 2 Whether only the person upon whom interest has devolved must seek leave to continue the suit under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC.

Ratio Decidendi

A decree passed against an original party without impleading a successor-in-interest due to devolution during pendency is not void ab initio; such omission does not render the decree nullity for purposes of execution under Section 47 CPC. The initial duty to seek leave to continue the suit lies upon the plaintiff, but any person interested may apply for leave to properly represent interests.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned order of High Court set aside
  • Order of executing Court restored