AMARJEET SINGH Vs. PANJAB AND SIND BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has assailed the Order dated 22/4/2003 passed by the Joint Registrar which records that the Appellant had not filed any Reply to the Interim Application seeking to implead the legal representative of Defendant No. 3 who had already expired prior to the filing of the Suit. The impugned Order is a cryptic one and keeping in view the circumstances of the case it is quite probable as has been strenuously contended before me that the counsel for the proposed Legal Representatives had orally raised various objections against the very maintainability of the application.

(2.) Learned counsel for the Appellant places reliance on the decision in Hira Lal Patni v. Sri Kali Nath, AIR 1962 Supreme Court 199, which categorically and unambiguously states that if a Suit is filed against a Defendant who was already dead on the date of the institution of the suit, it would be a nullity. This decision had been followed a Single Bench of this Court in Pratap Chand Mehta v. Smt. Krishna Devi Mehta, AIR 1988 Delhi 267. Prior thereto in Prestige Finance P. Ltd. (O.L.) v. Balwant Singh, 1978 Rajdhani Law Reporter 246, another Single Bench had also come to the same conclusion in the context of Order XXII of the Code of Civil Procedure without reference, however, to Hira Lal. It had been observed by D.K.Kapur, J. that while the provisions of Order I Rule 10 as also Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC may get attracted Order XXII could not come to the rescue of the Plaintiff. In Cuttack Municipality v. Shyamsundar Behera, AIR 1977 Orissa 137, after noting the binding precedent of Hira Lal, the Court observed that "a suit filed against a dead person is a nullity and that no substitution can be made in place of the original defendant who was dead on the date of the institution of the suit."

(3.) Learned counsel for the Respondent has relied on Rasetty Rajyalakshmamma v. Rajamuru Kannaiah, AIR 1978 Andhra Pradesh 279, which follows the Division Bench judgment in Khaja Begum v. Gulam Mohiuddin, AIR 1976 Andhra Pradesh 65. These judgments are per incuriam as Hira Lal was not cited or considered.