IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR FA No. 20 of 1998 (MOHAMMAD IQBAL @ KALLU KHAN Vs NAGAR NIGAM BHOPAL THRU. COMMISSIONER )

Dated : 09-03-2026 Shri Ashok Lalwani - Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Abhishek Singh - Advocate for the appellant.

Shri Ghanshyam Sharma - Advocate for the proposed L.Rs./natural heirs of appellant.

Shri Manish Kumar Rajak - Advocate for the respondent No.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.

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.

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.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

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.

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 c