CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2024) 07 DEL CK 0086

Laxmi Rajvansh And Anr vs Shama

Delhi High Court · Decided on 18 July 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Jain, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 2802 Of 2024 & Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 35367 Of 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 342 words

Manoj Jain, J

1.

Petitioners herein had filed an application under Order XXII Rule 3 of CPC read with Section 151 CPC praying therein that they may be impleaded as party after the death of plaintiff-Ms. Sarbati Devi, as they had become the owner of the property in question on the basis of one Will executed by her.

2.

During course of the arguments, learned counsel for petitioner has, very fairly, admitted that based on the aforesaid Will, the petitioners herein have already filed a petition seeking probate and such petition is still pending adjudication in which the objection has also been filed by the opposite side.

3.

Petitioners are seeking their substitution, merely, on the basis of the Will and admittedly, as on date, the genuineness of such Will is already under challenge in the aforesaid Probate Petition.

4.

Moreover, after the death of plaintiff-Ms. Sarbati Devi, her surviving LRs have already been brought on record.

5.

When asked, Mr. Upadhyay also revealed that the petitioners herein have already filed a separate suit against such LRs and others. In such newly instituted suit, they are seeking declaration that they be declared owner of the property in question and be also declared entitled to recover the rent with respect to the above property.

6.

Such suit is already pending before Competent Court and, in case, the petitioners feel that any urgent relief is required to be sought against such LRs or against any other person, they can always make appropriate request or prayer before the said Court.

7.

Be that as it may, in view of the peculiar facts placed before this Court, the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality. The petitioners have to first establish their right and only thereafter they can seek their impleadment in the suit in question. Since, they have already filed independent suit seeking declaration and recovery of rent, it automatically means that they are yet to perfect their title.

8.

Finding no merit in the present petition, the same is, hereby, dismissed in limine.