ORDER No.        06                                            Date:       01/08/2023

Today is fixed for hearing of this M. A. Case which has been initiated in view of the application filed by the complainant under Order 22 Rule 4 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. for substitution of the legal heirs of deceased OP No. 1, namely Anil Kr. Singh.

This matter has been contested by the Ops by filing written objection.

Heard Ld. Advocates of both sides.

Considered submission.

The argument highlighted by the Ld. Advocates of applicant side and Ops has been heard in full.

For the purpose of arriving at just and proper decision in this M. A. Case there is necessity of scanning the materials of this case record as well as the case record of Complaint Case No. CC/287/2020. On close scrutiny of the materials of this case record it is revealed that the applicant side has also filed an application under Section 5 of the limitation act for condonation of delay of 150 days in the matter of filing the substitution petition.

It is the main point of contention and argument of the applicant side that there is no intentional delay on the part of applicant side and they have filed the substitution petition from the date of knowledge.

On the other hand, Ld. Advocate for the Ops in course of argument pointed out that there are several latches on the part of applicant side and delay in the matter of condoning the delayed filing of substitution petition has not been properly explained.

On close examination of the materials of this case record it is found that there is no dispute over the issue that OP No. 1 Anil Kr. Singh has expired and the substitution petition has not been filed within time. But fact remains that in the absence of the legal heirs of OP No. 1, Anil Kr. Singh who is no more in this world, there is no scope of proper and complete disposal of the Complaint Case No. CC/287/2020. In other words, it can  be said that for the interest of arriving at just and proper decision in Complaint Case No. CC/287/2020 there is necessity of substitution of the legal heirs of deceased Anil Kr. Singh (OP No. 1). In this regard, it is important to note that that the delay of 150 days has more or less explained by the applicant side.

Considering all the above noted factors the prayer for substitution of the legal heirs of deceased Anil Kr. Singh is allowed on contest.

Let the original complaint petition be amended.

The complainant/applicant side is directed to take steps in this regard in Complaint Case No. CC/287/2020.

In the light of observation made above this M. A. Case No. MA/34/2022 is disposed of.

Dictated & corrected by me.

        President