- (1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner defendant, whereby, his application under order 14 Rule 5 C.P.C. read with Section 151 C.P.C. was rejected by the learned trial Court on coming to the conclusion that his written statement was not on record and, therefore, there is no requirement to frame any issue as proposed by the petitioner.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff Man Mal filed a suit for possession against defendant Mool Chand. The suit was filed by the plaintiff claiming himself to be the Karta of Hindu undivided family. A written statement was filed by Mool Chand and an objection was raised that the plaintiff cannot file the suit without obtaining succession certificate.
(3.) On the pleadings of the parties issues were framed in the case by the learned trial Court. It appears that the plaintiff Man Mal died during the pendency of the suit and his legal representatives 1/1 to 1/7 were impeaded as plaintiffs and they filed amended plaint. In the amended plaint it was claimed that late Man Mal was Karta of Hindu undivided family and said Man Mal had right to institute the suit for his benefit and for the benefit of the other family members and after his death the newly substituted plaintiffs being successors of man Mal were entitled to continue the suit. It appears that the sole defendant Mool Chand also died and in his place his legal representatives were impleaded as parties and Roop Chand S/o Mool Chand filed a written statement again questioning the locus of the plaintiffs in maintaining the said suit. A replication was filed by the plaintiffs to the said written statement filed by Roop Chand S/o Moot Chand and it was stated that after the death of man Mal the joint family disintegrated and in partition the suit premises came to the share of the plaintiffs 1/1 to 1/7 and, therefore, they have right to prosecute the suit.;