Himachal Pradesh High Court
General Manager Northern Railway vs . Jagat Ram & Others on 18 July, 2023
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
.
General manager Northern Railway vs. Jagat Ram & others RFA No.368 of 2012 18.07.2023 Present: Mr. Vir Bahadur Verma, Central Government Standing Counsel, for the appellant/non- applicant.
r to Mr. Ajay Thakur, Advocate vice Mr. Amit Jamwal, Advocate, for respondents/applicants. Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. B.C. Verma and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Rahul Thakur and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocates General, for respondent No. 3/State. CMP No.8450 of 2023 By way of instant application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of CPC, prayer has been made on behalf of the applicants/respondents, for their substitution in place of deceased respondent No.1, Jagat Ram, who has expired on 23.12.2015, as is evident from the Death Certificate placed on record as Annexure-A, leaving behind aforesaid applicants/respondents,as his legal heirs.
No reply is intended to be filed on behalf of the non-applicant/appellant.
Having perused the averments contained in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit as well as documents annexed therewith, i.e. Death Certificate as well as LRs. Certificate, this Court finds that respondent No.1, Jagat Ram has expired on 23.12.2015, leaving behind his LRs as detailed in para-1 of the application, who have otherwise approached this Court in the instant application, ::: Downloaded on - 20/07/2023 20:36:59 :::CIS .
praying therein for their substitution. Since right to sue survives in favour of the persons proposed to be substituted in place of deceased respondent No.1 coupled with the fact that right of the parties already stands settled with the passing of award dated 25.06.2011 by learned District Judge Una, H.P., whereby deceased respondent No.1, has already been awarded compensation qua his land used for the purpose of construction of railway line and the aforesaid award has attained finality with the passing of judgment dated 14.06.2023, by this Court in RFA No.367 of 2012 alongwith connected matter including RFA No.360 of 2012, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the application.
Consequently, in view of the above, the present application is allowed and the applicants/respondents, as detailed in para-1 of the application, are ordered to be substituted in place of respondent No.1, Jagat Ram, whose name is otherwise ordered to be deleted from the array of the parties. Application stands disposed of. CMP No.8452 of 2023
By way of instant application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of CPC, prayer has been made on behalf of the applicants/respondents for their substitution in place of deceased respondent No.2, Parkash Chand, who has expired on 10.08.2014, as is evident from ::: Downloaded on - 20/07/2023 20:36:59 :::CIS .
the Death Certificate placed on record (Annexure-A) leaving behind aforesaid applicants/respondents, as his legal heirs.
No reply is intended to be filed on behalf of the applicant/appellant.
Having perused the averments contained in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit as well as documents annexed therewith, i.e. Death Certificate as well as LRs. Certificate, this Court finds that respondent No.2, Parkash Chand has expired on 10.08.2014, leaving behind his LRs as detailed in para-1 of the application, who have otherwise approached this Court in the instant application, praying therein for their substitution. Since right to sue survives in favour of the applicants/respondents proposed to be substituted in place of deceased respondent No.1 coupled with the fact that right of the parties already stands settled with passing of the award dated 25.06.2011 by learned District Judge Una, H.P., whereby deceased respondent No.2, has already been awarded compensation qua his land used for the purpose of construction of railway line and the aforesaid award has attained finality with the passing of judgment dated 14.06.2023 by this Court in RFA No.367 of 2012 alongwith connected matter including RFA No.360 of 2012, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the application.
Consequently, in view of the above, the present application is allowed and the applicants/respondents, as ::: Downloaded on - 20/07/2023 20:36:59 :::CIS .
detailed in para-1 of the application, are ordered to be substituted in place of respondent No.2 Parkash Chand, whose name is otherwise ordered to be deleted from the array of the parties. Application stands disposed of.
r to Registry is directed to carry out necessary correction in the memo of the parties on the basis of amended memo of parties, annexed with the applications. CMP No.8454 of 2023
The application is disposed of with the direction that the applicant/petitioner shall file the English translation, within four weeks.
` RFA No.368 of 2012
Since, Mr. Amit Jamwal, Advocate has already filed Power of Attorney on behalf of newly impleaded respondents, there is no necessity to issue notices to them.
List after four weeks.
(Sandeep Sharma) Judge 18th July, 2023 (reena) ::: Downloaded on - 20/07/2023 20:36:59 :::CIS