JALADI SUGUNA Vs. SATYA SAI CENTRAL TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted. Heard.

(2.) The appellants claim to be the legal representatives of one Jaladi Suguna. The said Suguna had filed a suit in OS No. 658/ 1987 in the Court of Sub-ordinate Judge, Vijayawada, seeking a declaration that the registered gift deed dated 27-3-1980 executed by her in favour of the first Respondent Trust ('Trust' for short) in respect of the suit property was null and void and for a consequential injunction restraining the said Trust from interfering with her rights. The Trust was the first defendant and the tenant in occupation of a portion of the suit property was the second defendant in the said suit. The said suit was decreed by the Trial Court by Judgement and Decree dated 25-8-1999, declaring that the said gift deed to be void and restraining the Trust from interfering with her possession.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved, the Trust filed Appeal Suit No. 294/2000 in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Suguna who as the first respondent in the said appeal, died during the pendency of the appeal, on 21-3-2002. The Trust herein filed an application (CMP No. 10258/2002) to bring her husband (the third respondent herein) on record, as her legal representative. The appellants, who are the nieces and nephews of Suguna filed an application (CMP No. 13807/2002) seeking leave to come on record as her legal representatives. The husband of the deceased claimed that she died intestate and he was the sole legal heir. Incidentally, he also supported the case of the Trust in the litigation. The appellants claimed that the deceased had bequeathed the suit property to them under a will and they were interested in representing and safeguarding the estate of the deceased which included the suit property and they should therefore be permitted to come on record as the legal representatives of the deceased. Thus, there was a dispute as to who is or are the legal representatives of the deceased Suguna. Therefore, the High Court directed the Trial Court, under the proviso to Rule 5 of Order 22 of Code of Civil Procedure ('CPC' for short) to try the said question and submit its finding.