Punjab-Haryana High Court
S. Charanjit Singh And Anr. vs Bharatinder Singh And Ors. on 2 February, 1987
Equivalent citations: AIR1988P&H123, AIR 1988 PUNJAB AND HARYANA 123, 1988 HRR 132, (1987) 91 PUN LR 403.2, 1987 PUNJ LJ 137, (1987) 2 LANDLR 134, 1987 REVLR 168
ORDER
1. This order will dispose of Civil Revision Nos. 1577 to 1580 of 1986, as common questions arise therein.
2. Jaswant Kaur defendant died on 31-8-1983 during the pendency of the suit. Teja Singh and others filed an application for impleading her legal representatives, on the basis of. registered will dated 20-1-1980. Another application was filed by Charanjit Singh and others for impleading the natural heirs as legal representatives and disputed the genuineness of will set up by Teja Singh and others. The trial Court framed issues in view of the rival applications and after giving opportunity to the parties to lead evidence; by a long order of 17 pages dated 29th April, 1986, came to the conclusion that the will was duly proved and accordingly allowed the application. of Teja Singh and others arid dismissed the application filed by Charanjit Singh and others. Since there were four different suits, similar orders were passed in all them. These are revisions against the aforesaid orders.
3. A Full Bench of this Court in Mohinder Kaur v. Piara Singh, AIR 1981 Punj & Har 130, has held that determination of the point as to who is the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff or defendant under O. 22 R. 5 of the Civil P.C. is only for the purposes of bringing legal representatives on record for the conducting of those legal proceedings only and does not operate as resjudicata and the inter dispute between the rival legal representatives has to be independently tried and decided in separate proceedings. In view of this the proper course to follow is to bring all the legal representatives on record so that they vouchsafe the estate of the deceased for ultimate benefit of the real legal representatives. This would also avoid delay in disposal of the suit. In this case the death had occurred' on 3lst August. 1983 and the trial Court took two years and 8 months in determining as to which of the contesting parties is the legal representative, and wrote. 17 pages in passing the order. If the course suggested above had been followed, all this time and writing long order could have been avoided leaving the parties to get this matter settled in succession suit, on the basic of will or natural succession. I hope that the Subordinate Courts would keep this procedure/course in view while deciding such. type of applications.
4. For the reasons recorded above, the revision is allowed, the orders of the Court below are set aside and the question about the genuineness and validity of the will is left open, with a direction to the trial Court to implead all the persons shown as legal representatives in the two applications, so as to vouchsafe the interest of the estate of the of the deceased. Whenever suit for succession to the estate of Smt. Jaswant Kaur either on the basis of natural succession or on the basis of the will is filed, the matter would be determined therein without taking notice of the finding recorded by the Court below regarding the will in the impugned orders. There will however, be no order as to costs.
5. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear in the trial Court on 2-3-1987.
6. Revision allowed.