AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Arun Bhansali, J.
This writ petition is directed against the order dt. 12.12.2014 passed by the trial Court, whereby the application filed by the petitioner seeking issuance of notice to other legal representatives has been rejected. In a first appeal pending before this Court i.e. S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 651/2011, the question arose as to who were the legal representatives of Smt. Harpyari, the appellant before the Court and in view of the conflicting claims made, the Court referred the aspect to the trial Court under proviso to Order XXII, Rule 5 CPC for determination and sending its finding to this Court.
During the pendency of the proceedings, the present application was filed and it was prayed that all the legal representatives may be issued notice of the proceedings. The said application came to be rejected by the trial Court on 12.12.2014.
Any proceedings which are taken by the trial Court under proviso to Order XXII, Rule 5 CPC and any interlocutory order passed during the course of proceedings before the trial Court, has to be questioned before the Court which has referred the matter to the trial Court under the proviso either during the pendency of proceedings before the trial Court or after the finding is returned by the trial Court to the High Court and the same cannot be questioned by way of filing writ petition independent of the pending first appeal. In that view of the matter, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable, the same is, therefore, dismissed. However, the liberty is granted to the petitioner to move appropriate application in the pending first appeal.