Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jagdish Ram (Since Deceased) … vs Onkar Singh on 1 April, 2021Civil Revision-2399-2020 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision-2399-2020
Date of decision: – 01.04.2021
Jagdish Ram (since deceased) through LRs
….Petitioners
Versus
Onkar Singh
…..Respondent
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present:- Mr. Ashok Giri, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate
for the respondent.
***
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (ORAL)
In the present revision petition, the challenge is to the order
dated 30.09.2020 by which the application filed by the petitioners under
Order 7 Rule 11 for rejection of the plaint has been dismissed.
The factual matrix is that respondent-plaintiff filed a civil
suit seeking permanent injunction against sole defendant-Sh. Jagdish
Ram for restraining him from interfering in the possession of the
respondent-plaintiff or creating any hindrance or obstruction in the
peaceful use and enjoyment for irrigation of the fields of the respondent-
plaintiff from the tubewell/electric motor connection. It is a matter of fact
that during the pendency of the suit, sole defendant, namely, Jagdish Ram
unfortunately died on 23.07.2020.
1 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 02-04-2021 23:45:59 :::
Civil Revision-2399-2020 -2-
As the sole defendant-Jagdish Ram has died, the said fact
was brought to the notice of learned Court below. The legal
representatives of Sh. Jagdish Ram i.e. petitioners herein were brought on
record and thereafter, an application was moved by the legal
representatives under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for the rejection of the plaint
on the ground that the sole defendant against whom the averments were
made in the civil suit has already died and as there are no allegations
against the legal representatives and there is no prayer in the civil suit qua
them, therefore, the plaint is liable to be rejected.
The said application has been rejected by the learned Court
below by an order dated 02.09.2020 by noticing the fact that the legal
representatives of the sole defendant-Jagdish Ram are to succeed his
estate and therefore, the application filed by the legal representatives
under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is rejected. The said order is under challenge
before this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that in the present
case, all the averments and the allegations were against the sole
defendant-Sh. Jagdish Ram and the relief of injunction was also sought
against Sh. Jagdish Ram, hence, after the death of the said sole defendant-
Sh. Jagdish Ram, the suit cannot be proceeded further and the application
filed by the petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC has wrongly been
rejected.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the
absence of any allegations or prayer against the legal representatives of
Sh. Jagdish Ram, the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff cannot
2 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 02-04-2021 23:45:59 :::
Civil Revision-2399-2020 -3-
continue.
Learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff concedes before
this Court that in the suit, Sh. Jagdish Ram was the sole defendant and the
prayer of the respondent-plaintiff was also against the said Sh. Jagdish
Ram in respect of interfering in the joint possession of the respondent-
plaintiff and also from restraining the said Sh. Jagdish Ram from forcibly
dispossessed the respondent-plaintiff or creating any hindrance or
obstruction in the peaceful use and enjoyment of the property by the
respondent-plaintiff. It is further conceded that as of now in the civil suit
there is no prayer seeking any relief qua legal representatives of Sh.
Jagdish Ram.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone
through the record with their able assistance.
Learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff has not been
able to justify the continuation of the civil suit as to once there are no
averments against any of the legal representatives of the sole defendant-
Jagdish Ram or there is no prayer against them in the civil suit, how the
suit can proceed further. Learned counsel for the respondent, at this
stage, prays that the respondent-plaintiff be granted permission to file an
appropriate suit against the legal representatives of the deceased
defendant Sh. Jagdish Ram, who are to succeed his estate in case
respondent-plaintiff is aggrieved in any manner qua legal representatives
of Sh. Jagdish Ram.
In case, the respondent-defendant is aggrieved in any manner
against any of the legal representatives after the death of the sole
3 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 02-04-2021 23:45:59 :::
Civil Revision-2399-2020 -4-
defendant-Jagdish Ram, the respondent-plaintiff has a full right to initiate
appropriate proceedings against the legal representatives of the sole
defendant-Jagdish Ram, who has already died. No permission of the
Court is needed to initiate any proceedings against the legal
representatives of Sh. Jagdish Ram, if respondent-plaintiff is aggrieved
against them in any manner.
Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, after the
death of the sole defendant-Jagdish Ram and the nature of the present
suit, the same cannot continue and hence, the rejection of the prayer of
the petitioners as raised in the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11
CPC, vide impugned order dated 30.09.2020 cannot be sustained and the
said application is allowed and the plaint filed by the respondent-plaintiff
against sole defendant-Sh. Jagdish Ram, who has unfortunately already
died, is rejected keeping in view the facts & circumstances noticed above.
It is made clear that the respondent-plaintiff will be within
his jurisdiction to initiate any proceedings against legal representatives of
sole defendant-Jagdish Ram, who are to succeed his estate in case he is
aggrieved in any manner against them.
Present revision petition stands allowed in above terms.
( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI )
April 01, 2021 JUDGE
naresh.k
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes
Whether reportable? No
4 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 02-04-2021 23:45:59 :::
Comments