RAM DEV Vs. D N PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for substitution on behalf of the proposed heirs of Ram Dev, complainant who died on 30.1.1996. It has been alleged in the application that as complainant has died, his name may be deleted from the array of parties and the proposed legal heirs of the deceased be allowed to be incorporated. The application is opposed. In the objections it has been alleged by the opposite party that there is no provision under the Consumer Protection Act for substitution of the legal representatives in a pending case. Therefore, application filed for substitution is liable to be rejected. It is further alleged that the complaint will be deemed to have been abetted as the application for substitution has not been made within the prescribed time of limitation.

(2.) We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the opposite party has argued that in the complaint case if the complainant dies, the substitution cannot be permitted as the Consumer Protection Act has not provided for substitution in place of a deceased complainant. On the other hand, it has been argued by the learned Counsel on behalf of the complainant's heirs that substitution application can be moved under the General provisions.