Case Note & Summary
The Plaintiff, Nirav Deepak Modi, filed Suit No. 1166 of 2006 for specific performance of an agreement for sale concerning a suit property. The suit was filed on 13 April 2006, and a lis pendens was registered on 2 May 2006. During the pendency of the suit, Defendant No.1 transferred the suit property to Defendant Nos.3 and 4 by a Deed of Conveyance and Power of Attorney dated 13 December 2007. Subsequently, Defendant Nos.3 and 4 were added as party defendants. The suit proceeded to trial. Defendant No.1 died during the pendency of the suit. The Plaintiff filed Chamber Summons No. 614 of 2014 seeking impleadment of the legal heirs of deceased Defendant No.1. At the hearing, the other defendants furnished the particulars of the legal heirs, and the Plaintiff proposed a draft amendment to add two legal heirs as Defendant No.1(a) and 1(b). The draft amendment was allowed by consent. Defendant Nos.3 and 4 filed Chamber Summons (Lodging) No. 1056 of 2014 seeking leave to continue the proceedings as legal representatives of Defendant No.1 under Order 22 Rule 4 and/or Order 22 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The court noted that Defendant Nos.3 and 4 were already parties to the suit and had a right to continue the proceedings. The court allowed both chamber summonses, impleading the legal heirs and granting leave to Defendant Nos.3 and 4 to continue the proceedings.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Impleadment of Legal Heirs - Order 22 Rule 4 CPC - Plaintiff sought impleadment of legal heirs of deceased Defendant No.1; particulars of heirs were furnished by other defendants; draft amendment allowed by consent; court ordered joinder of proposed Defendant Nos.1(a) and 1(b) (Paras 1-2).
B) Civil Procedure - Leave to Continue Proceedings - Order 22 Rule 4 and Order 22 Rule 10 CPC - Defendant Nos.3 and 4, who had purchased the suit property from Defendant No.1 during pendency of suit, sought leave to continue proceedings as legal representatives of Defendant No.1; court held that they were already parties and had a right to continue; leave granted (Paras 3-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the legal heirs of deceased Defendant No.1 should be impleaded and whether Defendant Nos.3 and 4 should be granted leave to continue the proceedings as legal representatives of Defendant No.1 under Order 22 Rule 4 and/or Order 22 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Final Decision
Both Chamber Summonses allowed. Draft amendment to add legal heirs as Defendant No.1(a) and 1(b) allowed by consent. Defendant Nos.3 and 4 granted leave to continue proceedings as legal representatives of Defendant No.1.
Law Points
- Order 22 Rule 4
- Order 22 Rule 10
- Code of Civil Procedure
- 1908
- Impleadment of legal heirs
- Leave to continue proceedings
- Lis pendens
- Transfer of property pending suit
Case Details
Chamber Summons No. 614 of 2014 in Suit No. 1166 of 2006 and Chamber Summons (Lodging) No. 1056 of 2014 in Suit No. 1166 of 2006
Shiraz Rustomjee, Senior Advocate with Ashish Kamat, Duhita Lewis, Anuja Jhunjhunwala for Plaintiff; Kunal Vajani, Pranaya Goyal, Raghav Gupta, Dhwani Shah for Defendant No.1; Kalpesh Nansi for Defendant No.2; J.P. Sen, Senior Advocate with Rajiv Singh, Yuvraj Singh, Vividh Tandon for Defendant Nos.3 and 4
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale of property.
Remedy Sought
Plaintiff sought impleadment of legal heirs of deceased Defendant No.1; Defendant Nos.3 and 4 sought leave to continue proceedings as legal representatives of Defendant No.1.
Filing Reason
Death of Defendant No.1 during pendency of suit; need to bring legal heirs on record and for transferees to continue proceedings.
Previous Decisions
Defendant Nos.3 and 4 were added as parties earlier upon transfer of property during pendency of suit.
Issues
Whether the legal heirs of deceased Defendant No.1 should be impleaded in the suit.
Whether Defendant Nos.3 and 4, who purchased the property during pendency of suit, should be granted leave to continue proceedings as legal representatives of Defendant No.1.
Submissions/Arguments
Plaintiff submitted that particulars of legal heirs were not known at the time of filing Chamber Summons; later furnished by other defendants; draft amendment proposed to add two legal heirs.
Defendant Nos.3 and 4 submitted that they were already parties and sought leave to continue proceedings as legal representatives of Defendant No.1 under Order 22 Rule 4 and/or Rule 10 CPC.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the legal heirs of a deceased party must be impleaded to continue the suit, and that transferees of property during pendency of lis pendens, who are already parties, are entitled to continue proceedings as legal representatives under Order 22 Rule 4 and Rule 10 CPC.
Judgment Excerpts
The draft amendment is allowed by consent of the parties and the Chamber Summons will be considered for joinder of the proposed Defendant Nos.1(a) and 1(b).
Defendant Nos.3 and 4, who are already parties to the suit, are entitled to continue the proceedings as legal representatives of Defendant No.1.
Procedural History
Suit filed on 13 April 2006 for specific performance. Lis pendens registered on 2 May 2006. During pendency, Defendant No.1 transferred property to Defendant Nos.3 and 4 on 13 December 2007. Defendant Nos.3 and 4 were added as parties. Suit proceeded to trial. Defendant No.1 died. Plaintiff filed Chamber Summons for impleadment of legal heirs. Defendant Nos.3 and 4 filed Chamber Summons for leave to continue as legal representatives.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 22 Rule 4, Order 22 Rule 10
