KAILASH KAPOOR Vs. NARESH CHANDRA MISRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision has been filed by Shrimati Kailash Kapoor and Ravi (Ruby) Kapoor, who are the wife and the son of Shri Nand Gopal, against the order of Shri Suresh Chand Jain, Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Delhi, dated 2nd March, 1970, on certain applications filed in Suit No. 107 of 1966 on his file.

(2.) The respondent herein, Naresh Chandra Misra, filed the suit, No. 107 of 1966, for recovery of Rs. 5,600.00 against one Nand Gopal alleging that he had advanced Rs. 5,500.00 on a cheque, that the same was not paid back, and that he, therefore filed the suit for the recovery of the amount. During the pendency of the suit, the defendant Nand Gopal died on 2nd February, 1967. The respondent (plaintiff) filed an application on 26th April, 1967, praying that Mrs. Nand Gopal, Kailash Kapoor.Vikram Kapur, G. K. Kapoor, Smt. Rani and Shrimati Nami be impleaded as the legal representatives of the deceased. Kailash Kapoor, Vikram Kapoor and G. K. Kapoor were alleged to be the sons of the deceased, while Shrimati Rani and Shrimati Nami were alleged to be the daugthers of the deceased. The application was opposed by Mrs. Nand Gopal who filed a reply, dated 4th August, 1967, stating that the four persons named by the respondent (plaintiff) in his application viz., Kailash Kapoor, G. K. Kapoor, Smt. Rani and Smt. Nami, were not the children of the deceased. She, however, did not state whether there were any other children of Nand Gopal, nor did she point out that her own name was Kailash Kapoor. On 5th September, 1967, the respondent (plaintiff) filed a replication stating, inter alia, that he made all possible efforts to find out the names of the legal representatives of the deceased and the only source from which he could collect the names of the legal representatives was the Ration Card of the family of the deceased wherein the names mentioned by him in his application, dated 26th April 1967, were stated, and that in the circumstances, the widow of Nand Gopal may be directed to disclose the correct names of all the legal representatives of the deceased. No order appears to have been passed on this application and the same is stated by the counsel to be still pending.

(3.) Then, on 24th February, 1968, the counsel for the respondent (plaintiff) made a statement that he gave up the claim against other legal heirs as their names & addresses were not known to him in spite of his best efforts to find them. After recording the said statement, the Court adjourned the case to 7th March, 1968. In the mean time, on 4th March, 1968, the widow of Nand Gopal and Vikram Kapoor filed a further reply stating that the deceased Nand Gopal left behind him his widow Smt. Kailash Kapoor, two sons and two daughters, that the respondent (plaintiff) sought to bring on record only the widow Shrimati Kailash Kapoor and Vikram Kapoor as legal representatives, that the other legal heirs, a son and two married daughters, could not be dispensed with as the suit could not proceed in their absence, and that the suit should, therefore, be dismissed as having abated. It was also stated that G. K. Kapoor, who was described as a son of the deceased, was in reality the brother of the deceased. The respondent (plaintiff) then filed a replication on 23rd April, 1968, stating that though it was stated in the reply that the deceased left behind him two sons and two daughters, their names were not disclosed, that he was not able to get the correct names and particulars of all the legal representatives in spite of his best efforts, and that in the circumstances the suit could not be said to have abated.