https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175065 In land acquisition compensation proceedings involving claimants with distinct and independent shares, a common judgment passed for convenience was treated as severable rather than a single joint and inseverable decree. Abatement caused by the death of some appellants did not destroy the entire appeal, because the surviving claimants' rights could be adjudicated without producing contradictory or unenforceable decrees. The Court also emphasised that delay in substitution and setting aside abatement should be approached liberally where procedural default by some parties should not defeat substantive adjudication for others. The dismissal of the appeals in entirety was therefore held unsustainable, and the matters were remitted for fresh disposal on merits after substitution. en-us Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 11:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175065 In land acquisition compensation proceedings involving claimants with distinct and independent shares, a common judgment passed for convenience was treated as severable rather than a single joint and inseverable decree. Abatement caused by the death of some appellants did not destroy the entire appeal, because the surviving claimants' rights could be adjudicated without producing contradictory or unenforceable decrees. The Court also emphasised that delay in substitution and setting aside abatement should be approached liberally where procedural default by some parties should not defeat substantive adjudication for others. The dismissal of the appeals in entirety was therefore held unsustainable, and the matters were remitted for fresh disposal on merits after substitution. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175065