IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAJESH SHANKAR, J.
Sadik Miyan – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. – Respondents
W.P. (C) No.5821 of 2013
Decided On : 25-02-2025
(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order 22 - Substitution of legal representatives - The applicants, being the six sons of the deceased petitioner, sought substitution following the death of the original petitioner, Sadik Miyan, on 12th August, 2017 - The court permitted the substitution of both sons and daughters of the deceased as legal representatives. (Paras 2, 6)
(B) Legal representatives - The court recognized the need for legal representatives to be substituted in ongoing proceedings upon the death of a party, ensuring that the heirs can continue the case. (Paras 2, 6)
Facts of the case:
The original petitioner died during the pendency of the writ petition, leaving behind six sons and two daughters. The respondents confirmed the death and the heirs through a Gram Sabha meeting.
Findings of Court:
The court allowed the substitution of the deceased's legal representatives to ensure proper continuation of the proceedings.
Issues: The main issue was whether the sons and daughters of the deceased petitioner could be substituted in his place.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that legal representatives must be substituted to continue the proceedings, emphasizing the importance of ensuring that the heirs are represented.
Result: Substitution allowed.
ORDER :
RAJESH SHANKAR, J.
I.A. No.2273 of 2024:
1. The present interlocutory application has been filed by the applicants-sons of the original petitioner-Sadik Miyan for their substitution in this case.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the original petitioner-Sadik Miyan has died during the pendency of the writ petition on 12th August, 2017 leaving behind six sons (the applicants) as his heirs/legal representatives. Hence, they may be permitted to be substituted in place of the deceased petitioner.
3. Pursuant to the order dated 5th August, 2024, a supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.6.
4. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari, learned S.C.-I, refers to paragraph no.7 of the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no.6, which reads as under:
“7. That in compliance of the order dated 05.08.2024, an enquiry was conducted for the same through holding a Gram Sabha at Panchayat Bhawan, Ghutua on 20.08.2024. It was found that Sadik Miyan died on 12.08.2017 leaving behind six sons namely 1) Kayum Ansari 2) Kudus Ansari 3) Md. Manzoor Ali 4) Anwar Hussain 5) Mahtab Alam 6) Intaf Alam and two daughters 1) Sabila Khatoon 2) Zabila Khatoon which is evident from the minutes of the meeting held at Panchayat Bhawan, Ghutua on 20.08.2024 under the chairmanship of one Fatima Khatoon, Ward Councillor of Municipal Council, Ramgarh.
Photocopies of report dated 14.08.2024, the minutes of the meeting along with photocopies of the Aadhar Card are being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure A series to this supplementary counter affidavit.
5. It is, thus, submitted by learned S.C.-I that in addition to the applicants, two daughters of the deceased petitioner namely Sabila Khatoon and Zabila Khatoon may also be substituted in place of the deceased petitioner.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, let six sons of the deceased petitioner (the applicants) and two daughters namely Sabila Khatoon and Zabila Khatoon be substituted in place of the deceased petitioner.
7. Learned counsel for the applicants is permitted to make necessary substitution in the cause title of the writ petition in course of the day.
8. I.A. No.2273 of 2024 is, accordingly, disposed of.
W.P. (C) No.5821 of 2013:
9. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that Vakalatnama on behalf of the newly substituted petitioner nos.1 to 6 has already been filed along with the aforesaid interlocutory application. He undertakes to file Vakalatnama on behalf of the newly substituted petitioner nos.7 & 8 within two weeks.
10. Put up this case under the heading “For Admission” after six weeks.
Legal representatives must be substituted in ongoing proceedings upon the death of a party to ensure proper continuation of the case.
Substitution of legal representatives of deceased parties in ongoing proceedings is permissible under the Civil Procedure Code to ensure continuity of the case.
Substitution of parties in ongoing litigation is valid when consented by surviving parties, ensuring procedural compliance for representation of deceased respondents.
Substitution of legal representatives for deceased parties in proceedings where no objection from other parties exists is permissible under procedural law.
The court emphasizes the importance of compliance with procedural orders regarding the substitution of deceased parties and verification of live status in ongoing proceedings.
Substitution of legal heirs in a pending case is permissible when justified, ensuring continuance of legal proceedings despite the death of the original petitioner.
Legal heirs are permitted to substitute deceased petitioners in ongoing proceedings.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.