Back
VIVEK AGARWAL
SOBHARAM S/o ASHARAM SAHU – Appellant
Versus
CHOL SINGH S/o DILLI SINGH – Respondent
ORDER : – This Miscellaneous appeal is filed by the plaintiffs being aggrieved of order dated 23-10-2003 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Lakhnadon refusing to entertain an application under Order 22 Rule 9 Civil Procedure Code read with Rule 11 and section 5 of the Limitation Act dated 1-3-2000 on the ground that plaintiff Annobai who had filed appeal 96-A/98 died on 8-1-1999.
2. The application was filed on 17-4-1999 seeking substitution of legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff to be made a party. That application was dismissed vide order dated 20-12-1999 when the application under Order 22, Rule 9 and 11 read with section 5 of the Limitation Act was filed on 1-3-2000 and the same has been dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Lakhnadon on the ground that since order dated 20th December, 1999 rejecting an application under Order 22, Rule 3 was not challenged, therefore, second application is not maintainable.
3. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Banwari Lal (dead) by L.Rs. and another vs. Balbir Singh, 2016(4) M.P.L.J. (S.C.) 248 wherein it is held that the provisions of Order 22 are not penal in nature.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of Order 22 are meant to ensure continuation and culmination into an effective adjudication, not to foreclose an adjudication o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of Order 22 of CPC are procedural and should not curtail the substantial rights of the parties. The Court emphasized the applic....
Procedural rules under O.22, CPC should advance justice and not penalize parties for minor delays.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's power to treat an application under Order 22 Rule 4 of CPC as an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC, allowing for the substitutio....
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.
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
