(1.) This is an application for substitution. The applicants are the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased sole appellant Ramanand Agarwalla who died during the pendency of the appeal. They have prayed for their substitution in the appeal in place of the deceased sole appellant. The application has been filed within time and the same is in form. The application has been opposed by the respondent No. 1. It is necessary to state certain facts for the purpose of appreciating the contentions made by the respondent No. 1 in opposing the prayer of the applicants for their substitution in place of the deceased sole appellant.
(2.) The said Ramanand Agarwalla entered into a contract with the respondent No. 1, a foreign company, for the purchase of 7942 ordinary shares of Rs. 100/-each which the respondent No. 1 held in the respondent No. 2, Hooghly Ink Company Limited which is an existing company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956. The contract of sale was subject to the approval of the Reserve Bank of India of the sale of the said 7942 shares by the respondent No. 1 to the said Ramanand Agarwalla. It appears that the Central Government, by their letter dated Dec. 24, 1974, approved of the said contract of sale inter alia on the following terms :--
(3.) It has been strenuously urged on behalf of the respondent No. 1 that on the death of the sole appellant the right to sue does not survive and, accordingly, his heirs and legal representatives cannot be substituted in his place. Rule 3 (1) of Order XXII of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that where one of two or more plaintiffs died and the right to sue does not survive to the surviving plaintiff or plaintiffs alone, or a sole plaintiff or sole surviving plaintiff dies and the right to sue survives, the Court, on an application made in that behalf, shall cause the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff to be made a party and shall proceed with the suit. The provisions of Order XXII also apply to appeals by virtue of Rule 11 of Order XXII of the Code of Civil Procedure. Rule 3 (1) requires that before the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased sole appellant can be substituted it should be proved that the right to sue survives. It has been urged by Mr. Sen, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 1, that as the sanction or approval of the Reserve Bank of India was granted to the said Ramanand Agarwalla, such approval or sanction does not ensure to the benefit of his heirs and legal representatives and, accordingly, the right to sue does not survive. It has been stated already that the suit out of which this appeal arises is a suit for specific performance of contract and for recovery of damages. Section 15 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 inter alia provides as follows: