RADHA AGRAWAL Vs. DIPESH AGRAWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition is against the order dated 15/01/2018 whereby an application under Order 22 Rule 3 read with section 151 of CPC was decided and allowed in favour of the respondent Dipesh Agrawal and he was substituted on the basis of the registered Will.

(2.) Brief facts of this case is that one Santara Devi had filed a civil suit for ejectment against Mohanlal petitioner herein. During pendeny of the suit, Santara Devi breathed her last on 14/11/2014 and thereafter an application was filed under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of CPC that the property in question has been bequeathed in favour of the respondent by way of a registered Will, therefore he may be substituted as plaintiff in the suit. The court below allowed the application under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of CPC and directed for substitution of the legal heirs on the basis of the Will. The said order is under challenge.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the dispute is inter se in between the family members and ejectment is not been sought on the ground that it is landlord tenancy suit. It is further contended that other legal heirs of the Santara Devi have instituted a suit wherein alleged WILL is in question. He further submits that the substitution of the respondent was objected on the ground that Will in question is void, therefore if such substitution is made on the basis of the Will, ipso facto it will have the effect of decision in the subsequent civil suit, therefore enquiry should have been conducted for the authenticity of the Will or in alternate the petitioners be allowed to be made a party in the suit to safeguard any adverse finding against them.