MALATESH S/O NEELAPPA DODDAMANI Vs. YALLAVVA DODDAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 23.10.2017 passed by Additional Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Haveri, on I.A. No.3 in Final Decree Proceedings No.3 of 2007, filed by the respondents seeking to implead the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner No.1(A) on record before the Court of Final Decree Proceedings, the present petition is filed.

(2.) The only contention urged by the petitioners' counsel, Sri Pruthvi K.S., is that earlier I.A. No.2 was filed under Order XXII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code seeking for the very same relief. The same was rejected. Hence, the second application is not maintainable. The same is disputed by the respondents.

(3.) On hearing learned counsels, I do not find any merit in this petition. The earlier application was filed under Order XXII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of CPC. There was a delay in bringing the legal representatives on record. There was no application seeking condonation of delay or to set aside the abatement. Therefore, it was dismissed with costs. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that the said application to bring the legal representatives on record was rejected on merits. The earlier application was rejected on the ground of absence of application seeking condonation of delay. Under these circumstances, the lower Court was justified in allowing I.A. No. The legal representatives are necessary to be brought on record for the just and final adjudication of the proceedings.