- (1.) THE present Petitioner is one of the legal heirs of original Defendant in S.C.C. R.A.D. Suit No.1221/4374 of 1978. The Petitioner by this Revision Application impugns the order dated 13th August, 1991 passed in R.A.D. Suit No.1221/4374 of 1978 and S.C.C.L.B. & C. Suit No.297/428 of 1979. By the said order the Court of Small Causes has directed that Notice No.954 of 1993 be heard first along with the application dated 29th April, 1991 and then the restoration application be heard. The Petitioner is aggrieved by this latter part of the order.
(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the original Defendant expired sometime in the year 1983. That, as no application was moved within the prescribed period of limitation the suit abated. That, application was moved for setting aside the abatement much after the period of limitation and consequently the Court ought to have directed that this Application also be considered before the Application for restoration is heard. After hearing the Counsel on the merits of the Petition, certain directions will be required to be given so as to do justice between the parties. The Original Plaintiff had filed the suit against the Defendants for a declaration that he is a tenant of the premises which consists of 3 shops. After filing of this suit the original Defendant expired, sometime in the year 1983. On 15th February, 1991 the Plaintiff also expired. Till date neither the legal heirs of the Plaintiff nor for that matter the legal heirs of the Defendant have been brought on record.
(3.) IN so far as the Plaintiff is concerned, there are two applications, one by the purported brothers of the deceased Plaintiff, which application was moved as far as back as on 3rd April, 1991 and the other application by the purported wife and children of the deceased Plaintiff which has been numbered as Notice No.954 of 1993. The Court will have to decide these two applications, so as to decide, who, amongst the Applicants, are entitled to proceed with the proceedings. In other words the Court will have to decide amongst the two Applicants as to who can step into the shoes of the original Plaintiff. This, the Court will have to do before it continues any further steps in the matter.;