Karan Singh Saini vs Baljeet Singh (Now Deceased) ...
2014 Latest Caselaw 3474 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                         CM(M) 720/2014

%                                                          1st August, 2014

KARAN SINGH SAINI                                         ......Petitioner
                          Through:       Mr. Vipin Kumar Saini, Advocate.


                          VERSUS

BALJEET SINGH (NOW DECEASED) THROUGH ITS LRS.
                                        ...... Respondents
                  Through:

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not?


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

C.M. No.12296/2014 (exemption)

1.           Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

             C.M. stands disposed of.

+ C.M.(M) No.720/2014 and C.M. No.12295/2014 (stay)

2.           Powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are

extraordinary powers and are exercised only when grave injustice is caused

by the order of the court below. Orders which are passed allowing the




CM(M) 720/2014                                                     Page 1 of 3
 application to bring on record the legal heirs ordinarily cannot be interfered

with under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.


3.           By the impugned order dated 18.3.2014, the legal heirs of the

defendant no.1, who died on 26.7.1998, were allowed to be brought on

record by allowing the application under Order 22 Rule 4 of Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908 (CPC) read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

The delay in filing the application was because of the fact that the death

certificate and the details of the legal heirs were not filed till 4.2.2008, and

thereafter immediately on 28.2.2008, the subject application was filed, and

which has been allowed.


4.           No doubt, the suit is pending since the year 1996, however, I do

not have to look into the merits of the case because the impugned order only

allows bringing on record the legal heirs of the defendant no.1 and if the

defendant no.2/petitioner has a strong case on merits he will contest the

same in accordance with law, however, that does not mean that the

impugned order such as the one allowing bringing on record the legal heirs

should be interfered with under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.


5.           I may note that in any case there cannot be an issue of

abatement of the suit on account of death of the defendant no.1 because
CM(M) 720/2014                                                      Page 2 of 3
 admittedly the defendant no.2 is the son of the defendant no.1, and he was

already on record. Once, one legal heir of a deceased defendant is on record,

the issue is only of addition of other legal heirs and not of abatement and

which is another reason for this Court not to interfere with the impugned

order in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India.


6.           Dismissed.




AUGUST 01, 2014                             VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

Ne