Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MAGHAR SINGH & ORS. versus SUKHDEV SINGH & ORS.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Maghar Singh & Ors. v. Sukhdev Singh & Ors. - CR-2761-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 11509 (30 November 2006)

CR No. 2761 of 2005 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CR No.2761 of 2005 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 5.12.2006

Maghar Singh & Ors. ..Petitioners

Vs.

Sukhdev Singh & Ors. ...Respondents

CORAM Hon'ble Mr.Justice Vinod K.Sharma
Present: Mr.L.S.Sidhu, Advocate,

for the petitioners.

Mr.J.S.Virk, Advocate,

for respondents No.1 to 4.

Vinod K.Sharma, J. (Oral)

Present revision petition has been filed against an order vide which the application moved by the petitioners under Order 22 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code) for being brought on record the legal representatives of deceased Bachan Kaur has been dismissed.

The only reason given for the dismissal of the application by the learned Trial Court was that the suit was filed by Bachan Kaur daughter of Maghar Singh through her Attorney S.Maghi Singh, who had further claimed that he was her only legal representative on the basis of Will executed in his favour. The applicants have disputed the Will. The fact that the petitioners are the legal representatives of Bachan Kaur is not CR No. 2761 of 2005 2

disputed. In view of this, it was not right on the part of learned Trial Court to have dismissed the application merely on the ground that the suit has become 6 years old. The applicants-petitioners were to be brought on record as the legal representatives of Bachan Kaur and were to step into her shoes without any independent right and therefore, the pendency of suit for a particular period was of no consequence.

Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the application moved by the petitioners under Order 22 Rule 2 of Code of Civil Procedure is allowed.

(Vinod K.Sharma)

5.12.2006 Judge

rp


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.