In Suresh Chandra (Deceased) Thr. LRs & Ors. v. Parasram & Ors., the Supreme Court of India, on July 18, 2025, addressed the issue of abatement in a second appeal arising from a property dispute. The original suit filed by Parasram for declaration of title, possession, and mesne profits was dismissed by the trial court but decreed in his favor by the first appellate court. Suresh Chandra and Ram Babu jointly appealed to the High Court. During the pendency of the appeal, Ram Babu died in 2015, but his legal representatives were not substituted until 2022. The High Court rejected the application for condonation of delay and declared the appeal abated. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, holding that the appellants failed to show sufficient cause for the delay. It further ruled that the second appeal abated in its entirety due to the joint and inseparable nature of the defense. Since the defendants based their claim on a common title, allowing the appeal to proceed only for one would result in inconsistent and conflicting decrees. The Court also clarified that Order XLI Rule 4 CPC, which permits one party to appeal on behalf of all, does not apply where the appeal is jointly filed and one party dies without substitution. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the delay was unjustified and the entire appeal had abated.