AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS petition is for impleading the legal representatives of the deceased second complainant who died pending complaint. To this petition the opposite parties have filed objection. The main objection taken up by the opposite party is that as per Section 214, Indian Succession Act, Succession Certificate is necessary to be produced before impleading the legal representatives of the deceased. The other objection is, the cause of action would not survive.
THE learned Counsel for the petitioner in IA submitted that since the amount which the complainants are entitled to is yet to be adjudicated; the same being not a liquidated or, ascertained amount, the sum cannot be treated as a debt within the meaning of Section 214 of Indian Succession Act, 1925. Reliance was made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner on the decision in 1998 (2) KLT 912, Resilikutty Chacko v. State of Kerala, to maintain that a debt has to be an obligation to pay an ascertained sum of money. On the other hand the learned Counsel for the counter-petitioner sought to maintain that the policy amount is ascertained, the same is debt. THEre is dispute as to the amount to which the complainant is entitled to or eligible; whereas the opposite parties would maintain, the complainant is entitled to only an amount of six lakhs, the complainant would maintain that they are entitled to ten lakhs. That being the nature of the contest, it certainly is a matter for adjudication as to what is the actual amount to which the complainant is entitled to. When the position is so, applying the principle laid down to ''debt'' in Resilikutty Chacko v. State of Kerala (supra), the argument of the learned Counsel for the counter-petitioner/opposite party cannot be accepted. As to the second point raised by the opposite party since the relationship of the parties is based on a contract, it has to be held, that the right to sue would survive. Therefore, the petition has to be allowed; we do so. The petitioner will incorporate the names of the legal representatives in the complaint and then will be posted for additional version, if any to 11.11.1999. Petition allowed.