Representative fatal accident claims do not abate on death of one respondent; substitution of interested persons may proceed.

A suit under section 1A of the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 is representative in character because it is brought for the benefit of the spouse, parents and children of the deceased, even if filed in the name of one legal representative alone. Treating it like a representative suit under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC, the death of one representative party does not attract abatement under Order 22. The court distinguished a joint decree situation and held that the real issue was whether the deceased respondent's legal representatives and other interested persons could be brought on record so the appeal could continue. The objection based on abatement was overruled and substitution was directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal had abated on the death of the sole respondent and, if not, whether the deceased respondent's legal representatives and all persons for whose benefit the original suit had been brought could be brought on record.

Analysis: A suit under section 1A of the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 is brought for the benefit of the spouse, parents and children of the deceased and is therefore representative in character, even if instituted in the name of one legal representative alone. Such a proceeding stands on the same footing as a representative suit under Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in which the death of one representative party does not attract abatement under Order 22. The court distinguished the case from a joint decree situation and held that the real question was not abatement but whether the remaining interested persons could properly be brought on record so that the appeal could proceed.

Conclusion: The appeal had not abated. The objection based on abatement was overruled and substitution of the persons represented by the deceased respondent was directed.

---