S.Periasamy v. Nachimuthu Gounder,

C.M.P.Nos.3867, 3876 & 3990 of 2022 C.M.P.Nos.3867, 3876 & 3990 of 2022 in S.A.No.892 of 2004 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

These three Civil Miscellaneous Applications have been filed consequent to the death of the sole appellant viz., P.Periyasamy and to bring on record his legal representatives, as the appellants 2 to 4. There had been a delay and therefore the appeal had also abated. 2.In the affidavit filed, it had been stated that apart from the sole appellant, the 4th respondent had also died which necessitated to bring on record the legal representatives. It had been stated that in this process there was a delay and it had been stated that the delay is neither willful nor wanton.

3.Heard the learned counsel for the respondents, who had entered appearance on behalf of the legal representatives of the 4th respondent. 4.The Second Appeal had been admitted and substantial questions of law had been framed. It is only appropriate that the Court answers the said substantial questions of law.

1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.P.Nos.3867, 3876 & 3990 of 2022 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

ssi 5.In view of that particular view, these petitions are allowed. Registry may carry out necessary amendments indicating the death of the sole appellant and also indicating the death of the 4th respondent and bringing on record the proposed legal representatives in accordance with the name stated in the Civil Miscellaneous Petitions. 15.07.2022 (2/2) ssi C.M.P.Nos.3867, 3876 & 3990 of 2022 in S.A.No.892 of 2004 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis