( 1 ) THE matter arises out of an application filed on behalf of the plaintiff/petitioner for substitution of the heirs of the deceased OP Nos. 1 and 2 after setting aside abatement on condonation of delay. Though not specifically mentioned in the cause title the instant application is to be treated as an application under Order 22, Rule 9 C. P. C. read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act. It is alleged that during the pendency of this revisional application the OP/defendant No. 1 died intestate on 8/07/1994 leaving behind her daughters OP No. 1 (a) and 1 (b) as her heirs and legal representatives and that the OP/defendant No. 2 also died intestate on 7-11-1995 leaving the OPs 2 (a) to 2 (c) as his legal heirs and representatives. All the proposed heirs are stated to be major, sui juris and suffering from no legal disability. The petitioner's case is that although prayer for substitution of the heirs of the aforesaid deceased defendant/op Nos. 1 and 2 was made in the Trial Court in connection with the Title Suit No. 15 of 1991, he had no idea or legal knowledge that he had to take steps for substitution in the instant revisional application also. It is th