Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Lower Court Order on Substitution of Legal Representatives

Justice Deepak Khot emphasizes a liberal and justice-oriented approach in civil proceedings involving the substitution of legal heirs.

In a significant judgment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice Deepak Khot, has quashed an order passed by the II Civil Judge, Junior Division, Uchehara, District Satna, concerning the substitution of legal representatives (LRs) in a civil suit. The High Court's decision comes in response to a petition filed by Kirti Jain and others, who were aggrieved by the rejection of their applications for bringing the LRs of two defendants on record.

The original applications for substitution were dismissed by the lower court on the grounds of procedural lapses, including the absence of a death certificate and family tree for one of the deceased defendants. However, Justice Khot emphasized that the substitution of LRs should be handled with a liberal approach, ensuring justice is served rather than adhering strictly to procedural technicalities.

The High Court referenced the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Om Prakash Gupta alias Lalloowa v. Satish Chandra, underscoring that a prayer for substitution inherently includes a prayer for setting aside abatement. The judgment emphasized that the courts should not deny adjudication on merits due to procedural shortcomings, advocating for a justice-oriented approach.

Justice Khot noted that the applications were unopposed by the defendants and highlighted the inherent power of the court to substitute LRs. The High Court's decision mandates a fresh consideration of the applications, instructing the lower court to align with the principles laid out by the Supreme Court.

This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that procedural technicalities do not impede the delivery of justice, reinforcing the need for a pragmatic approach in civil litigation.

Bottom Line:

Application for substitution of legal representatives (LRs) in a civil suit filed under Order 22, Rule 4 CPC ought to be considered liberally and justice-oriented approach must be adopted even if explicit prayer for setting aside abatement is not made.

Statutory provision(s): Order 22, Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Kirti Jain v. Chamanlal Jain, (Madhya Pradesh)(Jabalpur) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2799336