SATYA PAL Vs. AMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question in this revision petition is whether the learned Sub Judge was right in dismissing the petitioner's suit as having abated.

(2.) The suit was filed by the manager of the Naraina Education Society, a jsociety registered under the Societies' Registration Act and running a Middle School for girls at Naraina. The dispute in the suit related to a ground admeasuring 83'x68' adjoining the school on the west and connected therewith by a door. According to the petitioner, the school building and the ground formed part of a large Khasra No. 953 jointly owned by a large number of cosharers including defdants 1 to 7, different parts and parcels of which were in the exclusive possession of the different cosharers. The above ground had been in the possession of the society oversince 1955 and had been used as the playground for the school children. It was alleged that the first five defendants had in the past trespassed on the land and were again threatening to forcibly and illegally take possession thereof and with a view to achieve the said object were harassing the female staff and students of the school. The suit was filed in November 1967 for a perpetual injunction against the defendants Yad Ram and his sons, (there were two other proforma parties, the owners of the premises and grounds through whom the plaintiff claimed possession) from entering with the peaceful enjoyment thereof by the teachers and children of the school run by the Society. Subsequently, in August '68 the plaint was amended alleging that the defendants had trespassed on the land during the pendency of the suit and seeking a mandatory injunction directing them to vacate and give possession of the playground in dispute to the plaintiff.

(3.) Yad Ram, defendant No. 1 died on 17.3.1974. The plaintiff's counsel informed the court that as the sons of the defendant I were already on record he would bs taking no steps to implead the legal representatives of the deceased defendant. Thereupon, the other defendants applied to the court on 12.12.74 contending that as the plaintiff had failed to bring on record the legal representatives of the first defendant, in particular his six daughters, the suit had abated and required to be dismissed. This application has been allowed by the Sub Judge and hence this revision.