Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Parmeshwari Devi And Anr vs Lrs Of Shri Narayan Singh on 1 March, 2021
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4733/2017
1. Parmshwari Devi W/o Shri Ramji Lal
2. Ramji Lal S/o Shri Ganesha Ram, Both Are B/c Kumar,
Resident Of Chak 11 APD, Tehsil Sri Vijaynagar, District
Shri Ganganagar, Raj.
----Petitioners
Versus
Shri Narayan Singh S/o Shri Kala Singh, By Caste Rai Sikh,
Resident Of Kamrania, Tehsil Anoopgarh, At Present Peerwali,
Tehsil Hisar, District Peerawali Tehsil Hisar, District Hariyana
Since Deceased Through His So Called Legal Heir:
1/1 Darshan Singh
1/2 Makhan Singh
1/3 Surjeet Singh
1/4 Mahendra Singh S/o Narayan Singh, B/c Rai Sikh, R/o
Peeriwali, Tehsil/District - Hisar (Haryana)
1/5 Jeeto W/o Srangara Singh, R/o Rai Sikh, R/o Manewala,
Tehsil Suratgarh.
1/6 Preeto W/o Jeet Singh, B/c Rai Sikh, R/o Bhidana, Tehsil -
Fategarh.
1/7 Rano Bai W/o Gurnam Singh D/o Narayan Singh, B/c Rai
Sikh, aged about 60 years, R/o Bahiya
1/8 Seela Bai W/o Jeet Singh, B/c Rai Sikh, R/o Bhidana, Tehsil
Fategarh.
1/9 Bhindro W/o Goormeet Singh, B/c Rai Sikh, R/o Raniya,
District Sirsa (Haryana).
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.S. Thind
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Trilok Joshi
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Judgment
01/03/2021
1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioners have
challenged the order dated 23.03.2017, passed by learned Civil
(Downloaded on 02/03/2021 at 09:31:28 PM)
(2 of 3) [CW-4733/2017]
Judge, Sri Vijaynagar(hereinafter referred to as "the trial Court")
in Civil Suit No.12/2007, whereby application filed by the
respondents No.1/1 to 1/9 under Order XXII Rule 3 and 9 of Code
of Civil Procedure has been allowed by the trial Court.
2. Mr. D.S. Thind, learned counsel for the petitioners pointed
out that the trial Court by specific order has framed the following
issue No.6:
"vk;k izkFkhZx.k ukjk;.k flag mQZ tkxj flag iq= dkykflag nRrd iq=
o/kkok flag ds fof/kd okfjlku gS rFkk ukjk;.k flag o tkxj flag ,d
gh O;fDr gSA "
3. Having read the above issue, he argued that the learned trial
Court has allowed respondents' application dated 14.09.2012 and
substituted them as legal representatives of the deceased-plaintiff
- Narayan Singh, ignoring the fact that this very question is yet to
be examined qua issue No.6.
4. Learned counsel argued that the trial Court ought not to
have allowed the application without there being any evidence,
documentary or oral. He submitted that the trial Court will feel
bound by the impugned order at the time of deciding issue No.6.
And the issue No.6 has been rendered redundant, he argued.
5. Mr. Trilok Joshi, learned counsel for the respondents, on the
other hand, submitted that even if issue No.6 is to be decided, the
same cannot be decided in absence of respondents No.1/1 to 1/9,
as they have claimed themselves to be legal representatives of
deceased-plaintiff. Thus their substitution was necessary
6. He submitted that issue No.6 is still open and the trial Court
will take final view of the matter, while deciding this issue or suit
finally, obviously after requisite evidence has come on record.
(Downloaded on 02/03/2021 at 09:31:28 PM)
(3 of 3) [CW-4733/2017]
7. In considered opinion of this Court, issue No.6, as framed,
could not have been decided in absence of the present
respondents No.1/1 to 1/9, who have claimed themselves to be
the legal representatives of the deceased-plaintiff. Even for the
purpose of deciding issue No.6, the respondent's presence was
necessary in the suit proceedings.
8. Such being the position, without interfering with the
impugned order, the present writ petition is disposed of with the
direction to decide issue No.6 as preliminary issue, after taking
requisite oral or ocular evidence.
9. The remaining issues shall be decided (if required) after
issue No.6 is decided as preliminary issue.
10. Needless to observe that any finding or observation made by
the learned trial Court in its impugned order dated 23.03.2017 or
by this Court in the order instant, shall not come in the way of the
trial Court to decide issue No.6 independently and in accordance
with law.
11. Stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J.
165-Ramesh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
