JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT
Javed Iqbal Wani, J.
Hakim Din – Appellant
versus
Akbar Noor and Ors. – Respondents
CR No. 107/2011, CM No. 6573/2020, CM No. 3426/2022, IA No. 1/2016, CM No. 9348/2021, IA No. 82/2013, CM No. 2101/2023
Decided on 24.5.2023
(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order 1 Rule 10 (2) – Impleadment of party – Only two classes of persons can be added as parties to suit namely necessary party i.e. a person who ought to have joined as party and in whose absence no decree or order can be passed or proper party i.e. person whose presence is necessary for complete and effectual adjudication of questions involved in suit – Sine qua non for exercise of power by court is that proceedings must be alive and pending before court and power, being discretionary in nature has to be exercised reasonably and on sound judicial principles and before making any such order, court has also to bear in mind well established principles, such as, that plaintiff is dominus litis who has right to choose his opponent, as also that order of addition, deletion, substitution or transposition should not change nature of suit or cause of action or else interfere with rights accrued in favour of individual. [Para 8]
(B) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order XXII Rule 4 (3) –Abatement– Bringing on record legal heirs of deceased defendant - Right to suit must have survived – Such right must not have survived against sole surviving defendant or defendants alone – For maintaining application under Order-XXII R-4 for bringing on record legal heirs of deceased defendant, code has not prescribed any particular format – Only requirement is that application must be in writing and should be in language of Court supported by affidavit, though non filing of affidavit is curable irregularity – Application must contain names of legal representatives of deceased defendant and upon entertaining such application, Court must issue notice to proposed legal heirs/representatives of defendant for affording them opportunity of hearing and thereafter make appropriate order either grant application or refuse same – If such application is filed wherein suit has abated, same can also be treated as application for setting aside of abatement, in that, procedural provisions of Order-XXII CPC have been held to be procedural in nature and to be construed liberally to advance substantial justice – On death of defendant till his legal heirs are brought on record, suit/appeal remains in state of suspense and if court proceeds with matter that carries no legal effect. [Para 8]
(C) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order 1 Rule 10 (2), Order XXII Rules 4(3),10A – Impleadment of legal heirs – Ambit and scope of Order-1 R-10 (2) and Order-XXII R-4 CPC is totally different, while Order-1 R-10 (2) enables Court to add, substitute or strike down person impleaded as party to suit, Order-XXII R-4 on other hand requires plaintiff to bring legal heirs/representatives of deceased defendant on record – Where case is covered by Order-XXII R-4, provisions of Order-1 R-10 (2) stand excluded on well known principle “general words do not derogate special provisions” – It was incumbent and obligatory upon counsel for deceased defendant 1 to communicate death of said defendant to trial court under in terms of provisions of Order-XXII R-10-A CPC – Said provision is salutary in nature not being empty formality – When factum of death of defendant is reported and is recorded in order by Court, it is duty of other party to take steps for bringing on record legal heirs of defendant/s and need for diligence would commence from date of such knowledge. [Para 9]
(D) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order-1 Rule 10 (2), Order XXII Rules 4 (3),10A – Possession suit – Impleadment of legal heirs of defendant – Plaintiff/petitioner sought impleadment of legal heirs of deceased defendant 1 as party in suit on account of death of said defendant – Application filed by plaintiff/petitioner cannot by any sense of imagination, said to be application under Order-1 R-10 (2) CPC but application made under Order-XXII R-4 CPC – Since fact of death of deceased/defendant 1 had never been reported by counsel for defendant to trial court and consequently, trial court has also not recorded any such fact in record of proceedings, same leads to conclusion that plaintiff/petitioner was never aware about death of deceased defendant 1 or else of particular date, on which said defendant 1 died – Application filed by plaintiff/petitioner before trial court has not been considered by trial court having regard to aforesaid facts and circumstances in as much as, position and principles of law enshrined in Order-1 R-10 (2), Order-XXII R-4 & Order-XXII R-10-A of CPC – Order abating suit is not legally sustainable – Application filed by plaintiff/petitioner for substitution of deceased defendant by his legal representatives allowed. [Paras 10, 11]
Result: Revision petition disposed of.
Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points regarding the substitution of parties and the duty to communicate death:
ORDER (ORAL)
Javed Iqbal Wani, J.—Through the medium of the instant revision petition filed under Section 115 of CPC, the petitioner has thrown challenge to order dated 14.07.2011 (for short, “the impugned order”) passed by the court of Sub-Judge Rajouri (for short, “the trial court”) in case titled as “Hakam Din vs. Mohd. Rafiq & Ors.”.
2. The facts emerging from the petition would reveal that the petitioner herein filed a suit as plaintiff for declaration and possession against three defendants including defendant 1 namely Mohd. Rafiq.
3. The plaintiff/petitioner herein during the pendency of the suit filed an application for impleadment of the legal heirs of the defendant Mohd. Rafiq on the premise that the said defendant had died and since succession has opened up to the legal heirs of the deceased defendant in terms of Muslim law of inheritance and as such, they need to be impleaded as party to the suit.
4. The application filed by the plaintiff/petitioner herein came to be opposed by the defendants/respondents herein, inter alia on the grounds that the deceased defendant died on 06.12.2006 and that the plaintiff/petitioner herein was required to bring his legal heirs on record within the prescribed period of limitation and that the application being time barred as such is liable to be rejected.
5. The trial court upon considering the application (supra) filed by the plaintiff/petitioner herein, dismissed the same in terms of the impugned order holding that the suit has abated against the deceased defendant Mohd. Rafiq under Order-XXII R-4 (3) CPC.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. The fundamental question that begs consideration of this Court in the instant revision petition would be as to whether the application filed by the plaintiff/petitioner herein before the trial court was an application for impleadment of a party under Order-1 R-10 (2) CPC or else an application under Order-XXII R-4 CPC.
7. Admittedly, the plaintiff/ petitioner herein at the time of institution of the suit had impleaded the deceased Mohd. Rafiq as defendant 1. It is also an admitted fact that the application wherein, the impugned order has been passed came to be filed by the plaintiff/petitioner herein on 19.01.2009 much after the death of the deceased on 06.12.206. It is also not in dispute that in the application (supra) impleadment of the legal heirs of the deceased defendant in his place on account of his death came to be sought by the plaintiff/petitioner herein.
8. Before proceeding further in the matter, it would be appropriate to refer to Order-1 R-10 (2), Order-XXII R-4 CPC hereunder:—
“Order-1 R-10 (2). Court may strike out or add parties:- The Court may at any stage of the proceedings, either upon or without the application of either party, and on such terms as may appear to the Court to be just, order that the name of any party improperly joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, be struck out, and that the name of any person who ought to have been joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, or whose presence before the Court may be necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit, be added.”
A bare perusal of the aforesaid provision would show that the same provides for addition, deletion and substitution of the parties, to be done either upon or without an application of the either party on the fundamental principle as may appear to the Court to be just in order to enable it to effectually and conclusively adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit.
It further emanates from the above that, only two classes of persons can be added as parties to a suit namely:-
(i) Necessary party i.e. a person who ought to have joined as a party and in whose absence no decree or order can be passed or;
(ii) Proper party i.e. a person whose presence is necessary for complete and effectual adjudication of the
Impleadment of legal heir – On death of defendant till his legal heirs are brought on record, suit/appeal remains in state of suspense and if court proceeds with matter that carries no legal effect –....
The main legal point established is that the timely filing of applications under Order XXII Rule 4 and Rule 9 of the CPC is crucial, and delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause. Negligence ....
Amendment to pleadings concerning deceased defendants allows for exemption from substitution if they were ex parte and had no interest in the proceedings, and such request is not limited by the 90-da....
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....
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....
Point of Law : Code of Civil Procedure enjoins various provisions only for the purpose of avoiding multiplicity of proceedings and for adjudicating of related disputes in the same proceedings, the pa....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.