Back
2023 Supreme(P&H) 1667
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
Gurmeet Singh & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
Avtar Singh & Ors. – Respondents
CR No. 2888 of 2019
Decided On : 15-11-2023
For the Parties : Mr. Amit Arora
Legal representatives of a deceased defendant can be added to ongoing proceedings if plaintiffs were unaware of the defendant's death at the time of filing the suit.
Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order 22 - Legal representatives - The trial court refused to allow the application to bring on record the legal representatives of a deceased defendant - The court relied on Karan Kaur (died) vs. Dalip Singh (dead) through LRs, establishing that legal representatives can be brought on record when a defendant dies after the suit is filed - The plaintiffs were unaware of the defendant's death until informed and acted promptly upon learning - The previous order was set aside and application allowed. (Paras 2-4)
Facts of the case:
The plaintiffs filed a suit for possession against five defendants, including Sh. Avtar Singh, who had died without the plaintiffs' knowledge. Upon learning of his death, they promptly filed an application to bring his legal representatives on record.
Findings of Court:
The court set aside the trial court's order and allowed the application to include the legal representatives of the deceased defendant, directing the trial court to proceed with the suit accordingly.
Issues: The main issue was whether the legal representatives of a deceased defendant could be brought on record after the suit was filed, particularly when the plaintiffs were unaware of the defendant's death.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the principle from Karan Kaur’s case applies, allowing for the inclusion of legal representatives even after the defendant's death if the plaintiffs were not aware of the death at the time of filing.
Result: Revision petition allowed.
Judgment
Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, J.
As per the office report, respondent no.1(iv) and 1 (v) have not been served with a notice of this petition. Respondent no.1 Sh. Avtar Singh died and respondent no.1(i) to 1 (v) are his class I heirs. Respondent no.1 (iv) and 1 (v) are the married daughters of late Sh. Avtar Singh. The notice of the petition has already been served on the widow and two sons of late Sh. Avtar Singh. Hence, the service of notice on respondent no.1(iv) and 1 (v) is dispensed with.
2. The trial court, after noticing that the suit has been filed against defendant no.1, who was already dead, refused to allow the application filed to bring on record the legal representatives of defendant no.1. Learned counsel representing the petitioners relies upon the judgment passed in Karan Kaur (died) vs. Dalip Singh (dead) through LRs 2001 (1) PLR 514 to contend that where there are several defendants in the suit and only one has died on the date of filing of the suit, the legal representatives can be brought on record.
3. The plaintiffs filed a suit for possession against as many as five defendants including Sh. Avtar Singh. It is the case of the plaintiffs that they did not know about the death of Sh. Avtar Singh. The moment they came to know of the aforesaid development, they immediately filed the necessary application. Therefore, the judgment passed in Karan Kaur’s case (supra) is applicable to the facts of the present case.
4. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the order dated 13.02.2019 is set aside. The application filed by the plaintiffs to bring the legal representatives of respondent no.1 shall stand allowed. The trial court is directed to proceed with the suit accordingly.
5. The revision petition stands allowed. If so advised, the respondents shall have liberty to file an application for recall of this order.
6. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of.
