GURNAM SINGH Vs. RATTAN KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question that arises for consideration is, what pleas the legal representatives of a deceased defendant can raise in their capacity as heirs of the deceased defendant.

(2.) This question is hardly res integra and has been consistently settled by various pronouncement of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The law in relation thereto was reiterated in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Vidya Wati v. Man Mohan and Ors., (1996-1)112 P.L.R. 97, where the Court held as under:-

(3.) In order to apply the above principles to the present case, reference to basic facts would be necessary. A suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement dated 15.2.1990 regarding the property, subject matter of the suit was filed on 24.3.1994 by the plaintiff Gumam Singh against the defendant. On 24.6.1996 Desa Singh, the defendant, died and consequently on 2.8.1996 the legal representatives of Desa Singh were brought on the record. Evidence of the plaintiff was concluded on 11.2.1997 and defendants' evidence was closed on 26.4.1997. The case was fixed for August, 1997 for arguments when an application for amendment of the written statement was filed by the legal representatives on 2.8.1997. Vide this application the legal representatives wanted to amend the written statement so as to take up the plea that the property in dispute was an ancestral coparcenary/Joint Hindu Family property and the proposed alleged sale vide the agreement in question was neither for consideration nor for family's legal necessity. It was further averred that they were impleaded legal representatives but were not granted opportunity to file amended written statement.