Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Chain Singh – Appellant
Versus
Dharam Singh (since deceased) through legal heirs – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background: ex parte proceedings and impugned dismissal of impleadment. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. petitioners argue timely filing within 90 days. (Para 3) |
| 3. trial court erred by not verifying death date or impleading all lrs. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. set aside order; direct impleadment of legal representatives. (Para 8) |
Judgment :
Ajay Mohan Goel, J.
As despite service, none has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1(h), accordingly, said respondent is ordered to be proceeded against exparte.
2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed order dated 13.12.2016, passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), in Civil Suit No. 276/2013, titled Chain Singh & anr. Vs. Dharm Singh & Ors., in terms whereof, the application filed under Order XXII, Rule 4 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’) by the present petitioners/plaintiffs to bring on record the legal representatives of deceased defendant No.1, was dismissed. The impugned order reads as under:-
“Today, reply to application U/O 22, Rule-4 of CPC also filed by ld. Counsel for defendant No.5.
Heard. Record perused.
This order shall disposed off an application U/O 22, Rule-4 of CPC for impleading
Trial court cannot dismiss application under Order XXII Rule 4 CPC hyper-technically for omitted date of death or incomplete legal representatives list; must ascertain facts, implead missing parties ....
Procedure is handmaid of justice; delay in substituting legal representatives of deceased defendant condoned where death notice dubious, no timely objection by defendants, preventing harsh abatement.
The amendment to Order XXII Rule 4 of the CPC aims to ensure the continuation and culmination of effective adjudication and to prevent the proceedings from coming to an end summarily due to the death....
The main legal point established is that the timely filing of applications under Order XXII Rule 4 and Rule 9 of the CPC is crucial, and delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause. Negligence ....
A decree passed against a deceased party is null and void; proper procedure under Order 22 CPC must be followed to avoid automatic abatement.
Delay/Laches/ limitation - Sufficient cause – Meaning of - The expression ‘sufficient cause’ within the meaning of Section 5 of the Act or Order 22 Rule 9 of the Code or any other similar provision s....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
