JAVED IQBAL WANI
Hakim Din – Appellant
Versus
Akbar Noor – Respondent
Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Rajesh Bhushan, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Abhishek Wazir, Advocate
Judgement Key Points
Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points regarding the substitution of parties and the duty to communicate death:
- Suspense of Proceedings: Until the legal heirs of a deceased defendant are brought on record, the suit or appeal remains in a state of suspense; if the court proceeds with the matter in the meantime, it carries no legal effect. (!) (!)
- Duty of Counsel: It is incumbent and obligatory upon the counsel for a deceased defendant to communicate the death to the trial court under Order XXII Rule 10-A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). (!) (!)
- Distinction Between Rules: The ambit of Order 1 Rule 10(2) (adding necessary/proper parties) and Order XXII Rule 4 (substitution due to death) is totally different; where Order XXII Rule 4 applies, the provisions of Order 1 Rule 10(2) are excluded. (!) (!)
- Consequences of Non-Communication: If the fact of a defendant's death is never reported by their counsel to the trial court, the court may not have recorded this fact, leading to the conclusion that the opposing party (plaintiff) was unaware of the death. (!) (!)
- Illegal Abatement: An order abating a suit is not legally sustainable if the plaintiff was unaware of the defendant's death and the death was not reported by the defendant's counsel. (!) (!)
- Allowed Substitution: An application filed by the plaintiff for the substitution of a deceased defendant by their legal representatives should be allowed if the death was not previously reported to the court. (!)
- Counsel's Obligation: When a pleader comes to know of a party's death, they must inform the court, after which the court must give notice to the other party. (!) (!)
- Diligence Requirement: The need for diligence commences from the date the death is reported and recorded by the court; total inaction or negligence by the other party after such knowledge can lead to abatement. (!) (!)
- Application Format: There is no prescribed format for an application under Order XXII Rule 4; it must be in writing, in the language of the court, and supported by an affidavit (though non-filing of affidavit is a curable irregularity). (!) (!)
- Notice to Heirs: Upon entertaining an application for substitution, the court must issue notice to the proposed legal heirs to afford them an opportunity of hearing before making an order. (!) (!)
- Setting Aside Abatement: If a suit has abated due to the death of a defendant, an application to bring legal heirs on record can be treated as an application to set aside the abatement. (!) (!)
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 recor
Click Here to Read the rest of this document