RELIANCE CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD Vs. METRO PALUTAN INVESTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Chamber Summons is taken out by the plaintiff seeking exemption, under Order 22 Rule 4 (4) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the CPC) , from substituting or bringing on record the legal representatives of the deceased defendant No. 4 and also for an amendment of the plaint to change the name of the plaintiff.

(2.) As regards the prayer for amendment of name the plaintiff has pleaded that the name of the plaintiff company was changed subsequent to the filing of the suit. A copy of the fresh certificate of incorporation issued by the Deputy registrar of the Companies showing the amendment in the name is annexed to the Chamber Summons. In the circumstances I see no reason for not allowing the amendment of the plaint to change the name of the plaintiff.

(3.) As regards the prayer for exemption from bringing on record the legal representatives of the deceased defendant No. 4, it may be noted that the defendant No. 4 died prior to 2nd September, 2005. On two occasions i. e. , on 2nd september and 16th December, 2005 time was sought by the plaintiff for bringing the legal representative/s of the deceased defendant No. 4 on record. As no steps were taken even thereafter for bringing the legal representatives of the deceased defendant No. 4, by an order dated 13th December, 2006 this Court dismissed the suit as abated as against the defendant No. 4. Now, by this chamber Summons, the plaintiff seeks an order of exemption from bringing the heirs of the deceased defendant No. 4 on record.