Tuntun Gope v. Parmeshwar Das & Ors.

Patna High Court CWJC No.15630 of 2012 (2) dt.08-01-2013

23. Smt. Kamalawati Devi W/O Late Arjun Singh R/O Village- Abharanchak, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 24. Laldeo Singh S/O Late Arjun Singh R/O Village- Abharanchak, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 25. Baldeo Singh S/O Late Arjun Singh R/O Village- Abharanchak, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 26. Suresh Verma S/O Late Ram Jiwan Mahto R/O Village- Motepur, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 27. Ram Nath Verma S/O Late Ram Jiwan Mahto R/O Village- Motepur, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 28. Ram Kumar Verma S/O Late Ram Jiwan Mahto R/O Village- Motepur, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 29. Piyor Verma S/O Late Ram Jiwan Mahto R/O Village, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 30. Jeetendra Verma S/O Late Ram Jiwan Mahto R/O Village, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 31. Ajay Verma S/O Late Ram Jiwan Mahto R/O Village, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 32. Bhola Sao S/O Sheonandan Sao R/O Village, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 33. Suresh Gope S/O Ram Ashish Gope R/O Village, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 34. Smt. Janakiya Devi W/O Late Munshi Gope R/O Villge, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 35. Ram Pravesh Gope S/O Late Munshi Gope R/O Villge, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 36. Smt. Gayatri Devi W/O Ram Lakhan Gope, D/O Late Munshi Gope R/O Village- Kala, P.S.- Azawan, P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 37. Smt. Lalmati Devi W/O Late Sarjoog Singh R/O Village- Gobindpur, Sillhauri, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District-Patna 38. Akhilesh S/O Late Sarjoog Singh R/O Village, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 39. Mithilesh S/O Late Sarjoog Singh R/O Village, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 40. Asha D/O Late Sarjoog Singh R/O Village- Gobindpur, Sillhauri, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District-Patna 41. Lilawati Devi D/O Late Sarjoog Singh, W/O Not Known R/O Village- Tengaraila, P.O. & P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 42. Ram Chandra Yadav S/O Dwarika Yadav R/O Village- Hadaspura, P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 43. Devanti Devi D/O Late Amira Das R/O Village- Govindpur Sillhauri, P.O. And P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 44. Mania Devi D/O Late Amira Das R/O Village- Govindpur Sillhauri, P.O. And P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 45. Durgawati Devi D/O Late Amira Das R/O Village- Govindpur Sillhauri, P.O. And P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 46. Savita Devi D/O Late Amira Das R/O Village- Govindpur Sillhauri, P.O. And P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 47. Vijanti Devi D/O Late Amira Das R/O Village- Govindpur Sillhauri, P.O. And P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna .... .... Respondent/s 3 Patna High Court CWJC No.15630 of 2012 (2) dt.08-01-2013 ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shyam Kishore Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SHEEMA ALI KHAN ORAL ORDER 2 08-01-2013 Heard Counsel for the petitioner. This suit has been filed for a declaration that the sale deed executed in favour of the purchasers i.e. respondents 4 to 47 as null and void. The suit was filed in the year 1977. A petition has been filed on behalf of defendant 16A claiming that defendant nos. 2, 5 and 17 have died during the pendency of the suit. It is said that defendant no. 2 had died in the year 1985, defendant no. 5 had died sometime in the year 2005 and defendant no. 17 had died sometime in the year 2008. The petitioner claims that the heirs of the aforesaid defendants should be substituted so that the suit may proceed in accordance with law. At present, the stage of the case is that it is ready for final hearing. The Court below has rejected the application filed on behalf of defendant 16A on the ground that the aforesaid defendants 2, 5 and 17 had not appeared in the Court below and filed their written statements and thus, it is not necessary to substitute them in view of the provisions of sub- 4 Patna High Court CWJC No.15630 of 2012 (2) dt.08-01-2013 rule (4) of Rule 4 under Order XXII. Counsel for the petitioner relies on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Zahirul Islam vs. Mohd. Usman and others [(2003) 1 SCC 476]. In the case of Zahirul Islam, no exemption was sought by the parties for substitution and as such the Court held that the appellant was entitled to bring the heirs on the record. In the facts of this case, it would be proper that the Court below should pass an order expunging the names of those persons who had not appeared and filed their written statements or the persons who had died in order to remove any further confusion on this count. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. Prabhakar Anand/- (Sheema Ali Khan, J)