Skip to content


Jagatjit Industrial Corporation Vs. Union of India - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided On
Case NumberLetter Patent Appeal Nos. 40 of 1974 and 102 of 1975
Judge
Reported inAIR1981Delhi34; 19(1981)DLT48; 1980RLR696
ActsCode of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 22, Rule 3
AppellantJagatjit Industrial Corporation
RespondentUnion of India
Advocates: S.L. Bhatia,; R.H. Dhebar,; Y.K. Sabharwal and;
Excerpt:
a suit was filed in the name of firm against railways for recovery of money - the legal representative of the third partner filed an application under order 22 rule 3 of the civil procedure code, 1908 for bringing them on record and it was dismissed - subsequently the legal representatives of all the partners filled an application for adding them as parties as also application for condensation of delay - since there was no explanationn for inordinate delay, the application was dismissed - an appeal was filed against the same - the court held that the legal representatives were to be imp leaded as plaintiffs and it also held that there was to be no abatement of the suit - .....as jagatjit industrial corporation at kapurthata. there were three partners of the firm, viz. (1) jagat prakash, (2) jai prakash and (3) ved prakash. on 16th january, 1957 the firm brought a suit against the northern railway and two other defendants to recover rs. 29,000.00. the plaint was signed and verified by jai prakash as a partner of the. plaintiff firm. while the suit was being tried one partner after another died. jagat prakash died on 28.5.1968. jai prakash died on 1.5.1971. ved prakash died on 20.10.1972. so long as ved prakash was alive there was no difficulty. the difficulty arose when all the partners of the firm were dead. (3) after the death of the third partner there was no one to prosecute the suit. on 15.1.73 the l.r.'s ved prakash made an application under order 22.....
Judgment:

Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J.

(1) These two appeals raise a question of practice and procedure. Counsel for the parties tell us that there is no decided case on the point we are called upon to decide. inspire of their industry and research, they say, they have not been able to find a precedent which may govern the decision of this case. We will, thereforee, in the lonliness of our minds analyze the facts of the case and identify the Jegal principles apposite to be controversy.

(2) What happened in this case is this. There was a partnership firm known and styled as Jagatjit Industrial Corporation at Kapurthata. There were three partners of the firm, viz. (1) Jagat Prakash, (2) Jai Prakash and (3) Ved Prakash. On 16th January, 1957 the firm brought a suit against the Northern Railway and two other defendants to recover Rs. 29,000.00. The plaint was signed and verified by Jai Prakash as a partner of the. plaintiff firm. While the suit was being tried one partner after another died. Jagat Prakash died on 28.5.1968. Jai Prakash died on 1.5.1971. Ved Prakash died on 20.10.1972. So long as Ved Prakash was alive there was no difficulty. The difficulty arose when all the partners of the firm were dead.

(3) After the death of the third partner there was no one to prosecute the suit. On 15.1.73 the L.R.'s Ved Prakash made an application under Order 22 Rule 3, Code of Civil Procedure for bringing themselves on record. This application was beard by Prakash Narain J. He dismissed the application on 11.1.74, and ordered that the suit be 'struck off the record of pending suits'. His judgment is reported in 1974 Rajdhani Law Reporter 286.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //