Decided on September 20,1950

DURGA DASS Appellant
Ram Rakha Mal And Ors. Respondents


Kapur, J. - (1.) THIS rule is directed against an order passed by Mr. Bhal Singh, Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Tarn Taran.
(2.) ON 26 -6 -1939, the father of Durga Dass and Munahi Ram Defendants mortgaged the property in suit and on 25 -6 -1945 the mtgee. brought a suit for the recovery of the amount due on the mtge. On 29 -10 -1945, the case was taken to the H.C. on its revisional side and there as the father of Durga Dass died, his sons wore substituted in his place as his legal representatives. When the case went back to the trial Court the legal representatives raised pleas to which objection was taken by the mtgee and the learned Judge disallowed these fresh pleas to be taken. It is against this order that the legal representatives have come up in revision to this Court.
(3.) IT was contended by Mr. Chona the learned Counsel for the Respondent that when a Defendant, dies and his legal representatives are brought on the record the legal representatives are not entitled in law to raise fresh defences and he has relied on Ram Ugrah v. Ganesh Singh : I.L.R. (1940) ALL. 153 : A.I.R. 1940 ALL. 99 F.B., where a F.B. of the Allahabad H.C. held that the legal representatives could not raise objections after the passing of a preliminary decree. He also relied on Guli v. Sawan and Ors., 4 Lah. 72 :, A.I.R. 1924 Lah. 45, where a D.B. of the Lahore H.C. held that on the death of a party to the suit a legal representative was appointed merely in order that the suit might proceed and a decision arrived at; it was original parties' rights and disabilities that had to be considered. Another case that he has relied on is Kalidas Roy v. Girindra Mohan, A.I.R. 1921 Cal. 343 : (63 I.C. 92). That was a mtge. suit and it was held that the legal representatives could not take up fresh pleas.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.