KEWAL CHAND Vs. CIVIL JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved against the order dt. 11.01.2008 by which the trial Court allowed the application of the legal representatives of the plaintiff filed under Order 22 Rule 3 CPC and impleaded all the legal heirs of deceased plaintiff Geeta Devi as plaintiffs as legal representatives of Smt. Geeta Devi.

(3.) ACCORDING to learned Counsel for the petitioner the plaintiff's second application is beyond the statutory period of limitation and the suit of the plaintiff already abated before that. The plaintiff's legal representatives did not submit any application under Order 22 Rule 9 CPC for setting aside of the abatement of the suit. It is also submitted that the trial Court did not hold any inquiry about the Will dt. 18.03.2005 as is required under Order 22 Rule 5 CPC, therefore, the order of the trial Court suffers from error of law.