Narayan Shukla,J.: -

Heard Mr. Jaspreet Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. D.K.Pathak, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 23.7.2003, passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow in case No. TA 291 of 2002 (Annexure No.2) as also the order dated 7.12.2005, passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad in appeal, upholding the order passed by the Tribunal of the original jurisdiction.

3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the respondent No.3, State Bank of India, being plaintiff filed a regular suit before the court of Civil Judge, Lucknow, which was registered as Regular Suit No.215 of 1991 for recovery of a sum of Rs.18,49,822/- against the respondent No.4, Company as well as its guarantors.

4. During the pendency of the suit before the Civil Court two defendants i.e. defendant No.2 Shri B.R.Dubey and defendant No.4 Shri D.R.Dubey died. In the case at hand the controversy relates to the substitution of legal heirs of Mr.D.R.Dubey, defendant No.4, who died on 24th of December, 1997. The learned counsel for the answering respondent submits that the information of death of Shri D.R.Dubey,