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

2026 Supreme(MP) 543

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Deepak Khot, J.
Mohammad Iqbal @ Kallu Khan – Petitioner
Versus
Nagar Nigam Bhopal Thru. Commissioner – Respondent
FA No. 20 of 1998
Decided On : 09-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Shri Ashok Lalwani, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Abhishek Singh, Advocate, Shri Ghanshyam Sharma, Advocate for the proposed L.Rs.
For the Respondent:Shri Manish Kumar Rajak, Advocate

Under the Code of Civil Procedure, 'legal representative' is an inclusive term. For substitution, the court focuses on estate representation rather than final title adjudication, allowing both testamentary legatees and natural heirs to be impleaded without deciding the validity of the Will against succession rights.

Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order 22 Rule 3, Rule 5 and Section 2(11) - Legal Representative - Definition and scope - Substitution of parties - Death of appellant - Representation of estate - For the purpose of substitution under Order 22, the court is not required to adjudicate the actual title or the inter-se adverse title between rival claimants, such as natural heirs and a testamentary legatee; the primary objective is to ensure the estate of the deceased is properly represented (Paras 5, 9).

(B) Legal Representative - The definition under Section 2(11) is inclusive and wide, encompassing any person who in law represents the estate of the deceased or intermeddles with it, and is not confined solely to legal heirs (Paras 6, 7, 8).

(C) Order 22 Rule 5 - Determination of a legal representative is for the limited purpose of representing the estate in the specific proceedings and does not confer a final right to the property vis-à-vis other rival claimants (Para 8).

Facts of the case:
Following the death of an appellant, a person claiming representation based on a Will was substituted as a legal representative after an enquiry under Order 22 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Subsequently, the natural heirs of the deceased filed an application to be impleaded, contending that as natural heirs governed by the rules of succession, they also deserve to be substituted to represent the estate.

Findings of Court:
The court found that for the purpose of representation, it is not necessary to resolve the conflict between testamentary and non-testamentary succession. Since the status of the applicants as natural heirs was not disputed, they are entitled to be impleaded for the purpose of representation.

Issues: Whether natural heirs are entitled to be substituted as legal representatives when a testamentary legatee has already been substituted on the basis of a Will.

Ratio Decidendi: The concept of a "legal representative" is focused on the procedural necessity of ensuring the estate is represented to prevent the case from abating. Substitution is a limited determination for representation and does not decide the final ownership or who shall benefit from the decree. Any substantive dispute regarding rights to the estate must be established in a competent court of law.

Result: IA No. 4546/2026 disposed of and applicants directed to be impleaded as party/appellant.

Legal Category Hierarchy

  • practice and procedure
    • civil procedure
      • substitution of parties

Table of Contents

1. Application for substitution of legal representatives after death of appellant — Dispute between natural heirs and Will-claimant. (Para 1 )

2. Will-claimant contends substitution based on Will sufficient; natural heirs claim right to represent as per succession. (Para 2 , 3 )

3. IA disposed; natural heirs impleaded as parties, but must establish rights in competent court. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 )

4. What is the scope of enquiry under Order 22 Rule 5 CPC for substitution of legal representatives?

The enquiry is limited to determining who represents the estate; it does not decide adverse title between rival claimants. (Para 5 , 9 )

5. Does a legatee under a Will qualify as a legal representative under Section 2(11) CPC?

Yes, a legatee under a Will who intermeddles with the estate is considered a legal representative for representation purposes. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 )

6. Is the determination of legal representative under Order 22 Rule 5 CPC final on property rights?

No, it is only for representation in the case; the claimant must establish property rights in separate proceedings. (Para 8 , 10 )

JUDGMENT :

Deepak Khot, J.

1.Heard on IA No. 4546/2026, an application under Order 22 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, filed by the natural heirs of deceased appellant.

2. It has been contended by the learned senior counsel appearing for the legal representative represented through Will that the natural heirs are not required to be impleaded/substituted after the death of the original appellant because the application for substitution was filed by him on the basis of Will, which was again further referred to the Civil Court for enquiry under Order 22 Rule 5 of CPC. The Civil Court, after due enquiry, has found that the applicant's claim of representation of estate of the deceased appellant is based on Will, which is found to be genuine for the purpose of representation. Accordingly, this Court vide order dated 13.01.2026 has ordered substitution of the applicant claiming representation on the basis of Will as legal representative of the deceased appellant.

3. Counsel for the proposed applicant/L.Rs./natural heirs of the deceased appellant has submitted that the applicants being the natural heirs of the deceased deserve to be substituted after the death of the deceased appellant. It is submitted that estate of the deceased deserves to be represented through L.Rs. and it is not disputed that the applicants are not the natural heirs and governed by the rule of succession.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. It is evident that this Court vide order dated 19.09.2022 has ordered enquiry under Order 22 Rule 5 of CPC for impleadment of the proposed legal representative of the deceased appellant sought on the basis of Will. Thereafter, this application has been filed. Now the only controversy, which has been raised by the parties, that in case of decree, who will reap the fruits of the decree, the person in whose favour the Will has been executed by the deceased appellant or the natural heirs. It is settled law that for the purpose of representation, the Court is not required to see the adverse title of the parties inter-se, but it is the only purpose that the estate of the deceased party should be represented properly.

6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Custodian of Branches of Banco National Ultramarino vs. Nalini Bai Naique reported in 1989 Supp (2) SCC 275 in paras 4 and 5 has held as under:-

"4. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, we are of opinion that the learned Judicial Commissioner committed serious error of law in setting aside the order of the trial Judge. “Legal representative” as defined in Civil Procedure Code which was admittedly applicable to the proceedings in the suit, means a person who in law represents the estate of a deceased person, and includes any person who intermeddles with the estate of the deceased and where a party sues or is sued in a representative character the person on whom the estate devolves on the death of the party so suing or sued. The definition is inclusive in character and its scope is wide, it is not confined to legal heirs only instead it stipulates a person who may or may not be heir, competent to inherit the property of the deceased but he should represent the estate of the deceased person. It includes heirs as well as persons who represent the estate even without title either as executors or administrators in possession of the estate of the deceased. All such persons would be covered by the expression “legal representative”. If there are many heirs, those in possession bona fide, without there being any fraud or collusion, are also entitled to represent the estate of the deceased. In the instant case it is not disputed that under the Portuguese Law of Inheritance which was applicable to Goa at the relevant time Mrs Nalini Bai had acquired “Meeira rights” according to which she had acquired half share in the estate left by the deceased Vinaique Naique and the remaining half share was inherited by sons and daughters of the deceased who were subs

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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