MUNNI LAL Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Awadhesh Kumar, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Triveni Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.1 & 2. No one appears for respondent no.3, Gaon Sabha or respondent nos.4, 5 & 6.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed challenging an order dated 14.12.1993 passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad in Second Appeal no.44/1976-77, whereby the Board have ordered that upon death of Raja Ram (respondent no.1 to the appeal), his daughters, Smt. Parbatia and Smt. Phulbatia, be substituted in his place, and by the same order one Kariman (respondent no.6 to this petition) has also been permitted to be substituted in place of deceased Raja Ram, in the second appeal aforesaid. Kariman has been permitted to be substituted on the basis of the last will and testament said to have been executed by Raja Ram in favour of Kariman.

(3.) The question that arises for consideration in this petition is: Whether it is open to a Court where more claims than one are set up for substitution in place of a deceased party, to permit multiple parties with rival claims or interest to be substituted in place of the original plaintiff/ respondent/ appellant, or the Court is obliged to adjudicate the issue under Order XXII Rule 5 CPC, and decide in favour of one of them?