BILLAN KHAN Vs. SARDAR KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on I.A. No. 15411/2010, which is an application for deleting the names of respondent Nos. 1 and 8, namely, Sardar Khan and Smt. Rasulan respectively.

(2.) The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioners is that these respondents who were arrayed as defendants in the Trial Court, no relief has been claimed against them as well as these two defendants remained ex parte also and they had also died and, therefore, the names of respondent Nos. 1 and 8 be deleted from the cause title of this petition.

(3.) On being asked by us that as to whether the plaintiffs/petitioners have moved any application for substitution in the Trial Court, learned Counsel submits that there is stay of further proceedings of Trial Court vide order dated 13-7-2009 passed by this Court and, hence, even if any application is iiled. it will be a futile exercise on account of stay order. According to us, the argument appears to be misconceived for the simple reason that even if there is an order of this Court staying the further proceedings of the Trial Court, for collateral purpose an application could have been filed in the 'Trial Court and order could have been passed. In this context, it would be profitable to place reliance on the Division Bench decision of this Court in Madanlal Agrawal Vs. Kamlesh Nigam,1975 JLJR 323, in which in Paras 5 and 6 the Division Bench has held thus :-