KULVINDER SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of application under Order XXII Rule 3 and Order I Rule 10 read with Section 151 of CPC on behalf of legal representatives of late Shri Inderjit Singh Oberoi, petitioner No.2, and the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay, if any, in filing the applications for substitution/impleadment of legal representatives of deceased Late Shri Inderjit Singh Oberoi.

(2.) The applicants contended that the above noted probate case in respect of the registered will dated 4.1.1990 of late Shri Arjun Singh was filed by Dr.Kulwinder Singh, petitioner No.1, and late Shri Inderjit Singh Oberoi, petitioner No.2. The petitioner No.2, late Shri Inderjit Singh, died on 5th September, 2002, who was one of the beneficiaries of the will, leaving behind applicants as detailed in para 2 of the application as his legal representatives. The applicants asserted that due to inadvertence and oversight, they could not apply for their substitution on record immediately after the death of late Shri Inderjit Singh Oberoi as they were under impression that since it is a probate case where the probate of the will of late Shri Arjun Singh is being sought, even in absence of late Shri Inderjit Singh Oberoi, it will be granted to the petitioner No.1 and even the applicant will be entitled for whatever is devised to Late Shri Inderjit Singh Oberoi, after his demise.

(3.) The applicants contended that subsequently it transpired that they are also necessary parties and, consequently, the application for impleadment/substitution has been filed contending that no prejudice shall be caused to the respondents in case the legal representatives of late Shri Inderjit Singh Oberoi, applicants, are substituted/impleaded in his place.