SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Jhk) 1159

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAJESH SHANKAR, J.
Balram Choudhary & Ors. - Petitioners 
Versus 
Jayant Kumar Manjhi & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 7286 of 2011 With I.A. No. 3257 of 2022 & I.A. No. 3459 of 2022
Decided On : 22-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Praveen Shankar, Advocate, Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Resp.-State : Mr. P.K. Rai, A.C. to S.C.(L&C)-I

Substitution of legal representatives of deceased parties in ongoing proceedings is permissible under the Civil Procedure Code to ensure continuity of the case.

Headnote:

(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 22 - Substitution of parties - Petitioners sought substitution of deceased respondent and petitioner during the pendency of the writ petition - Court allowed substitution of heirs/legal representatives as per the provisions of the Code - Necessary steps for substitution to be taken by counsel. (Paras 1-12)

(B) Legal representatives - The legal representatives of deceased parties can be substituted in ongoing proceedings to ensure continuity of the case. (Paras 5, 9)

Facts of the case:
The writ petition involved the substitution of Sudarsan Kapri and Kangresh Choudhary, both of whom died during the pendency of the case, with their respective heirs.

Findings of Court:
The court permitted the substitution of the heirs/legal representatives of the deceased parties as per the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code.

Issues: The main issue was whether the heirs of the deceased parties could be substituted in the ongoing writ petition.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the substitution of legal representatives is necessary to maintain the continuity of the proceedings and is in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code.

Result: Substitution applications allowed.

ORDER :

RAJESH SHANKAR, J.

I.A. No. 3257 of 2022 has been filed on behalf of the petitioners for substitution of the respondent no. 3 - Sudarsan Kapri who has died during pendency of the writ petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent no. 3 – Sudarsan Kapri has died during pendency of the writ petition leaving behind his son namely Arjun Prasad Yadav as his heir/legal representative whose description has been given in paragraph-3 of I.A. No. 3257 of 2022. Hence, he may be permitted to be substituted in place of the deceased respondent no. 3.

3. Reference may be made to order dated 18.04.2022 whereby notice was issued to the heir of the deceased respondent no. 3 namely Arjun Prasad Yadav through speed-post.

4. It has been reported by the office that tracking report of the said notice issued to the proposed heir of the respondent no. 3 through speed-post is not available in the website of India Post. Moreover, no Vakalatnama has yet been filed on behalf of the proposed heir of the respondent no. 3.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and for the reasons stated in the present interlocutory application, let the deceased respondent no. 3 be substituted with his heir/legal representative namely Arjun Prasad Yadav whose description has been given in paragraph-3 of the present interlocutory application.

6. I.A. No. 3257 of 2022 stands disposed of.

7. I.A. No. 3459 of 2022 has been filed on behalf of the petitioners for substitution of the petitioner no. 2 – Kangresh Choudhary who died during pendency of the writ petition.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 2 – Kangresh Choudhary has died during pendency of the writ petition on 24.11.2018 leaving behind his wife namely Shakuntala Devi as his heir/legal representative whose description has been given in paragraph-3 of I.A. No. 3459 of 2022. Hence, she may be permitted to be substituted in place of the deceased petitioner no. 2.

9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and for the reasons stated in the present interlocutory application, let the deceased petitioner no. 2 be substituted with his heir/legal representative whose description has been given in paragraph-3 of the present interlocutory application.

10. I.A. No. 3459 of 2022 stands disposed of.

11. Necessary substitution in the cause title of the writ petition be made by the counsel for the petitioners in course of the day.

12. Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to file Vakalatnama on behalf of the newly substituted petitioner no. 2 within two weeks.

13. Issue fresh notice to the newly substituted respondent no. 3 through ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed by 30.01.2025.

14. Put up this case after six weeks under appropriate heading.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top