Limitation for Impleading LR or Legal Representative

It is clear, therefore, that if after the filing of an execution petition in time, the decree-holder dies and his legal representatives do not come on record - or the judgment-debtor dies and his legal representatives are not brought on record, then there is no abatement of the execution petition. If there is no abatement, the position in the eye of law is that the execution petition remains pending on the file of the execution court. If it remains pending and if no time limit is prescribed to bring the legal representatives on record, in execution proceedings, it is open in case of death of the decree-holder, for his legal representative to come on record at any time. The execution application cannot even be dismissed for default behind the back of the decree-holder's legal representatives. In case of death of the judgment-debtor, the decree- holder could file an application to bring the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor on record, at any time. Of course, in case of death of judgment-debtor, the Court can fix a reasonable time for the said purpose and if the decree-holder does not file an application for the aforesaid purpose, the Court can dismiss the execution petition for default. But in any event, the execution petition cannot be dismissed as abated. Alternatively, it is also open to the decree-holder's legal representatives to file a fresh execution petition in case of death of a decree-holder; or, in case of death of the judgment-debtor, the decree-holder can file a fresh execution petition impleading the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor; such a fresh execution petition, if filed, each, in law, only a continuation of a pending execution petition - the one which was filed in time by the decree- holder initially. This is the position under the Code of Civil Procedure."
Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Yashoda Devi vs Neeta Devi on 25 September, 2008

Citation: AIR2009Chh12

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Provision rent judgement

R.C. Lahoti, J. Late Parmodh Paul, who died during the pendency of the proceedings and whose legal representatives, the appellants before us, have been brought on record, filed a petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restrictions Act, 1949 (hereinafter 'the Act', for short), against the respondent-firm through its two partners on the ground of the tenants having defaulted in payment of rent, a ground for eviction under Clause (i) of sub-Section (2) of Section 13 of the Act. Hereinafter for the sake of convenience and brevity, Late Parmodh Paul shall be referred to as the 'landlord' and the respondents as the 'tenants'. According to the averments made in the petition for eviction filed on 17.9.1991, the suit premises were obtained by the tenants on tenancy from Shri Mani Ram and Smt. Ratan Devi, the then owners and landlords, under the rent note dated 20-9-1982. The rate of rent agreed upon was Rs.2000/- per month excluding
Read more

Consumer Protection Act, 1986

CONTENTS THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986 CHAPTER – I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title, extent, commencement and application 2. Definitions 3. Act not in derogation of any other law CHAPTER – II CONSUMER PROTECTION COUNCILS 4. The Central Consumer Protection Council 5. Procedure for meetings of the Central Council 6. Objects of the Central Council 7. The State Consumer Protection Councils 8. Objects of the State Council 8A. The District Consumer Protection Council CHAPTER – III CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL AGENCIES 9. Establishment of Consumer Disputes Redressal Agencies 10. Composition of the District Forum 11. Jurisdiction of the District Forum 12. Manner in which complaint shall be made 13. Procedure on admission of complaint 14. Finding of the District Forum 15. Appeal 16. Composition of the State Commission 17. Jurisdiction of the State Commission 17A. Transfer of cases
Read more

Judicial Review of Court's Decision

The Supreme Court, in Tata Cellular v. Union of India (1994) 6 SCC 651 was concerned with the extent of judicial review of decisions bona fide arrived at in tender cases and on a review of case law it was inter alia held that:- (i) there are inherent limitations in exercise of power of judicial review; (ii) judicial review is a great weapon in the hands of the judges; but the judges must observe the constitutional limits set by our parliamentary system upon the exercise of this beneficent power; (iii) the restraint has two contemporary manifestations - one is the ambit of judicial intervention; the other covers the scope of the court's ability to quash an administrative decision on its merits; (iv) these restrains bear the hallmarks of judicial control over administrative action; (v) judicial review is concerned with reviewing not the merits of the decision in support of which the application for judicial review is made, but the decision-making process itself; (vi) unless th
Read more