ARUN PRABHA Vs. SHEELA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Civil First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed by Sant Lal, Shila Devi and Pushpa Paul, appellants No. 1, 2 and 3 respectively in the Court of learned District Judge, Solan against the judgment and decree dated 27th June, 1998 in Civil Suit No. 39/1 of 97/85 in which Smt. Sumitra daughter of Shri Shiv Dutta was defendant No. 1 and Smt. Mohindra Kumari, Smt. Arun Prabha and Smt. Sharda Kumari were defendants No. 2, 3 and 4 respectively. Smt. Shila Devi and Pushpa Paul, appellants No. 2 and 3 undoubtedly were parties in Civil Suit No. 39/1 of 97/85. In the Civil Suit apart from appellant No. 1 Sant Lal, Dharam Singh was the first co -plaintiff but since Dharam Singh subsequently died, Shila Devi and Pushpa Paul, being his widow and daughter respectively joined Sant Lal as the co -appellants in the aforesaid first appeal.

(2.) The Civil suit was filed by plaintiffs Dharam Singh and Sant Lal for declaration to the effect that they were owners in possession of a particular piece of land and a mutation attested in the name of one late Lachhmi Devi and another mutation attested in the names of the defendants in the said suit was illegal, void ab initio and inoperative qua the rights of the plaintiffs. In the said civil suit the aforesaid two plaintiffs had also asked for consequential relief of permanent prohibitory injunction to restrain the defendants therein from causing interference in the suit land in any manner. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court on 27th June, 1998 against which the aforesaid first appeal was filed, as has been noticed at the outset. During the pendency of the first appeal the first respondent Sumitra Devi died. She died on 11th October, 1998. Consequent upon her death, appellant Sant Lal filed an application under Order 22 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the said application, he made the following prayer: - "It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the name of Smt. Sumitra may please be deleted from the array of respondents and Sh. Sant Lal appellant No. 1 may be treated as legal representative of deceased Sumitra."

(3.) The learned District Judge proceeded to consider and dispose of the said application and in the process framed the following three issues :