- (1.) B. K. Rathi, J. The respondent No. 1 filed PA. Case No. 43 of 1999 under Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972. During the pendency of the case, the respon dent No. 4 Smt. Dhooma died. The respon dent No. 1, therefore, moved an application that the deceased may be noted against her name as her heirs are already on record. The petitioner alleged that Smt. Dhooma has also left daughters as her heirs and they should also be impleaded. The Prescribed Authority by order dated 1-2-2001 allowed the application of respondent No. 1 and ordered that the deceased be noted against the name of Smt. Dhooma. He held that the daughters are not required to be impleaded. Aggrieved by it, the present petition has been preferred.
(2.) I have heard Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. S. Nigam, learned counsel for respon dent No. 1. Sri S. S. Nigam, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 has stated that he has no objection in the petition being allowed; that he is ready to implead the daughters of the deceased as opposite parties also. Accordingly, the petition is al lowed. The trial Court will permit the respondent No. 1 to implead the daughters of the deceased Smt. Dhooma as opposite parties and thereafter will proceed with the case expeditiously as it is very old matter.
(3.) THE petition is disposed of finally. Petition allowed. .;