MOHINDER KUMAR Vs. GODWIN BINDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition, petitioner has assailed order dtd. 30/6/2022, passed by learned Senior CivilJudge, Court No.2, Shimla in case No. 90037 of 2010, whereby the application of the respondent herein filed under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for bringing on record legal representatives of deceased petitioner/landlord was allowed.

(2.) Petitioner has assailed the impugned order on the ground that Master Krish Bindra could not have been brought on record to substitute the deceased petitioner by way of application under Order 22 Rule 3 CPC, as he did not qualifyto be the legal heir of original petitioner/landlord. It is contended that the deceased petitioner/landlord Sh. Godwin Bindra did not have any biological son. In case Master Krish Bindra was his adopted son, the fact had to be supported by a document, evidencing such adoption. As per petitioner, the right to sue could survive in favour of the legal heirs entitled to inherit the estate of deceased petitioner/landlord.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case file carefully.