H.N. Tilhari, J. - (1.) This Civil Revision arises out of an order dated 21-5-1988, passed by Chandra Shekhar, I Addl. Civil Judge, Bahraich, on the two applications, one moved under Order 22 rule 3 CPC by defendants i.e. present opposite-parties, namely, Chet Ram, Munejar and Sita Ram and the other application for substitution moved by the present revisionist claiming themselves to be entitled to be substituted on the basis of the will alleged to have been executed by the deceased in their favour and the court below without deciding the question of heirship has ordered that Smt. Parsanna whose name was sought to be substituted in place of Smt. Dhan Dei as well as that of the revisionist in place of Smt. Dhan Dei be brought on record.
(2.) The fact of the case in the nutshell are that a Civil Suit for cancellation of a Sale-deed dated 11-4-1983 had been filed by one Smt. Dhan Dei against Chet Ram, Munejar and Sita Ram, defendants-opposite Parties 1 to 3. The said suit was numbered as Regular Suit No. 49 of 1984. The suit was filed on the ground that the sale-deeds were got fraudulently executed by the defendants from the plaintiff Smt. Dhan Dei. Somehow or the other on 28-1-87, the suit of Smt. Dhan Dei was decreed ex parte against the defendant-opposite parties. The defendant i.e. opposite parties 1 to 3 moved an application under Order 9 rule 13 CPC for setting aside of the ex parte decree dated 28-1-87, on 6-2-87. During the pendency of the application for setting aside ex parte decree on 31-3-87, Smt. Dhan Dei, the original plaintiff died and, as such, on 29-4-1987, the defendants i.e. opposite parties 1 to 3 moved an application under Order 22 rule 3 CPC for substitution of the name of Smt. Parsanna in place of Smt Dhan Dei, the original plaintiff alleging that Smt. Parsanna is the husband's sister of the deceased Smt. Dhan Dei and so her name be substituted. They also mentioned that the present revisionist were claiming some rights to the property by succession to Smt. Dhan Dei on the basis of certain will. Lateron, the present revisionist also moved an application for substitution of their name in place of Smt. Dhan Dei. The revisionists-applicants claimed that Smt. Dhan Dei had executed a registered will on September 30, 1985 of her entire property movable or immovable in favour of the present revisionists.
(3.) They also filed an objection to the application of the opposite parties 1 to 3 and denied the right of Smt. Parsanna, the present opposite parties 1 to 4 for being substituted as an heir. They denied that she was the sister of the husband of the deceased, or that she shall be entitled to be substituted.;