SONDHI RAM Vs. UGGAR SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aforementioned two civil revision petitions filed by petitioner Sondhi Ram are directed against order dated 16.2.2012 of the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sangrur. As the matter in issue involved in both the petitions is the same, therefore, the same are being taken up together for adjudication. However, for convenience and clarity, facts have been taken from CR No. 2858 of 2012.

(2.) ORDER dated 16.2.2012 vide which amendment of plaint under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 C.P.C., was allowed by the lower court while permitting the legal representatives of plaintiff Satnam Singh to be impleaded after his death, giving them opportunity to amend the pleadings so as to incorporate the pleas which were available to them as legal heirs of Satnam Singh as also in their own right as well, is under challenge. Notwithstanding the objection raised by the defendants that said impleaded LRs could not have been allowed to take any plea other than which had been taken by deceased Satnam Singh in whose footsteps the LRs had stepped in, application of the LRs for amendment of the plaint was allowed.

(3.) IN the connected civil revision petition, in a suit filed by Sondhi Ram where Satnam Singh was impleaded as a defendant and after his death, his LRs were brought on record, written statement filed by Satnam Singh was allowed to be amended by his LRs impleaded in substitution of him wherein pleas other than taken by their father Satnam Singh and those which were available to them within their own right, were also allowed to be introduced.