Title: Rajveer Singh Vs Secretary State of M.P. and 2 Ors Writ Petition No. 11364
Date of Decision: 09.10.2023
CORAM: Justice Pranay Verma
Introduction
This case pertains to a Revision filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) by the plaintiffs, challenging an order passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Dewas, in RCS No.49-A/2019. The order in question, dated 06.07.2023, rejected the plaintiffs’ application under Order 23 Rule 1 of the CPC, seeking withdrawal of the suit with liberty to institute a fresh suit.
Facts of the Case
On 20.03.2019, the plaintiffs initiated a legal action seeking a declaration of their title to a specific parcel of land and a permanent injunction. During the course of the proceedings, Smt. Abhaya Bai, the legal representative of a deceased defendant (defendant No. 2), moved an application for the dismissal of the suit on the grounds that it had been instituted against deceased individuals. Her application was dismissed by the trial Court on 15.12.2022, stating that Smt. Abhaya Bai was not a party to the suit.
Subsequently, on 08.05.2023, the plaintiffs filed an application under Order 23 Rule 1(3) of the CPC, seeking to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit, arguing that the suit was null and void since it had been filed against deceased individuals. The trial Court rejected this application, asserting that the suit’s initiation against deceased persons did not constitute a formal defect and therefore did not warrant withdrawal.
Court’s Analysis and Decision
The central issue before the Court was whether instituting a suit against individuals who had already passed away before the suit’s initiation amounted to a formal defect that would permit withdrawal under Order 23 Rule 1(3) of the CPC. The Court referred to several legal precedents, including decisions of various High Courts and the Supreme Court.
The Court found that a suit filed against deceased individuals, under the belief that they were alive at the time of filing, was a nullity from its inception. Substitution of legal representatives in such cases was not permissible under Order 22 Rule 4 of the CPC. As the suit was essentially void, it could be withdrawn under Order 23 Rule 1(3) with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action.
In light of these findings, the Court set aside the trial Court’s order, allowed the plaintiffs’ application under Order 23 Rule 1(3) of the CPC, and granted them permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit as may be permissible under the law. The Revision was allowed, and no costs were imposed.
This judgment by the Madhya Pradesh High Court clarifies that instituting a suit against deceased persons is tantamount to a formal defect, allowing for the withdrawal of the suit and the initiation of a fresh suit on the same cause of action.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Tarishi Verma
