Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mallappa @ Malleshappa Fakkirappa Goudappanavar, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 09.09.2014 passed by the III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Dharwad in O.S.No.467/2009, which allowed an amendment application filed by the respondent No.3/defendant No.3. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner died on 26.09.2019. The legal representatives of the deceased petitioner filed I.A.No.1/2019 under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) seeking to come on record. The respondent No.3, who is a purchaser from respondents No.1 and 2, objected to the application. The court considered the objection and held that the application for substitution is a procedural right and the objection does not bar it. The court allowed the application and directed the legal representatives to be brought on record. The court also noted that the respondent No.3's objection was not sustainable as substitution is necessary for the continuation of the proceedings. The court did not delve into the merits of the main petition at this stage.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Substitution of Legal Representatives - Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC - Application for substitution of legal representatives of deceased petitioner - Objection by respondent No.3/purchaser - Held that the application is allowed and the legal representatives are brought on record, as substitution is a procedural right and the objection does not bar it (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the application for bringing legal representatives of the deceased petitioner on record should be allowed despite objection from the respondent No.3/defendant No.3.
Final Decision
The court allowed I.A.No.1/2019 and directed that the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner be brought on record.
Law Points
- Order 22 Rule 3 CPC applies to writ proceedings
- substitution of legal representatives is a procedural right
- objection by a party does not bar substitution
- legal representatives can continue proceedings
Case Details
2022 LawText (KAR) (07) 12
Writ Petition No. 100406 of 2017 (GM-CPC)
Shivaraj C. Bellakki (for petitioner), M.C. Hukkeri and R.S. Havaldar (for respondent No.3)
Mallappa @ Malleshappa Fakkirappa Goudappanavar (deceased) represented by legal representatives
Smt. Drakshyani W/o. Channaveerappa Anand, Sadanand S/o. Channaveerappa Anand, Vinod W/o. Shahaji Patil
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order on interim application for amendment of written statement in a civil suit.
Remedy Sought
The legal representatives of the deceased petitioner sought to come on record as legal representatives of the writ petitioner.
Filing Reason
The original petitioner died during the pendency of the writ petition, and his legal representatives filed an application to be substituted.
Previous Decisions
The trial court had passed an order dated 09.09.2014 allowing the amendment application of the defendant No.3, which was challenged in the writ petition.
Issues
Whether the application for substitution of legal representatives should be allowed despite objection from the respondent No.3.
Submissions/Arguments
The legal representatives of the deceased petitioner filed I.A.No.1/2019 under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC to come on record.
The respondent No.3/defendant No.3 objected to the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The application for substitution of legal representatives is a procedural right and cannot be denied merely because of objection by a party. The legal representatives are entitled to continue the proceedings.
Judgment Excerpts
The application in I.A NO.1/2019 is filed under Order 22 Rule 3 R/w. 151 of CPC, at the hands of the legal representatives of the sole deceased petitioner/ plaintiff, to come on record as legal representatives of the writ petitioner, who passed away during the course of these proceedings, on 26.09.2019.
This application is sought to be objected at the hands of the respondent No.3/ defendant No.3/ purchaser from respondents No.1 and 2.
In the light of the above, I.A.No.1/2019 is allowed. The legal representatives of the deceased petitioner are brought on record.
Procedural History
The original petitioner filed a writ petition in 2017 challenging an order dated 09.09.2014 passed by the III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Dharwad in O.S.No.467/2009. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner died on 26.09.2019. His legal representatives filed I.A.No.1/2019 for substitution. The respondent No.3 objected. The court heard the application and allowed it on 12.07.2022.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 22 Rule 3, Section 151
