Decision in favour of plaintiff – for specific performance – Exemption from substituting legal representatives granted – two I.A.s filed by the class II heirs of the defendants one under Order IX RULE 9 AND 13 and another under XXII RULE 4(4) got DISMISSED.
HELD: We are therefore of the considered view, that the learned Single Judge committed no error whatsoever in proceeding with the matter in CS (OS) no.2501 of 1997 ex-parte, as against the sole defendant Sushil K.C., without impleading his legal representatives in his place. We therefore, hereby, uphold the determination of the learned Single Judge, with reference to Order XXII Rule 4(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
27. For the reasons recorded herein-above, we find no merit in the instant appeals and the same are accordingly dismissed.
latest decision under Order XXII Rule 4(4) – under ORDER IX RULE 9 AND 13 : Sushil K. Chakravarty (D) Thr. LRs. Vs. Tej Properties Pvt. Ltd.’