Swami Vedvyasanand Ji Maharaj (D) vs Shyam Lal Chauhan 2024 INSC 352 – Order XXII Rule 5 CPC

Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908; Order XXII Rule 5 -Proviso to Rule 5 does not say that the Appellate Court can direct the subordinate court to decide the question as to who would be the legal representative, it only provides that the Appellate Court can direct the subordinate court to try the question and return the records to the Appellate Court, along with the evidence and the subordinate court has then to send a report in the form of a reasoned opinion based on evidence recorded, upon which the final decision has to be made ultimately by the Appellate Court, after considering all relevant material. While dealing with the report sent by the subordinate court under Order 22 Rule 5 of CPC, the Appellate Court may consider the findings of the subordinate court and then give its reasons before reaching any conclusion. The words ‘the Appellate Court may take the same into consideration in determining the question’ used in the proviso to Rule 5 gives discretion to the Appellate Court to make its own separate opinion notwithstanding the opinion of the subordinate court. The proviso cannot be construed to be a delegation of the powers of the Appellate Court to substitute the deceased party, but is merely to assist it in ultimately deciding the issue of substitution. Thus, the Appellate Court ‘may’ take into consideration the material referred by the subordinate court under Rule 5 of Order 22, CPC along with the objections, if any, against the report while deciding on the substitution of the appellant. (Para 17)

Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908; Order XXII Rule 5 -The only purpose of substitution is the continuation of the case. The substitution as LR in a case by itself will not give any title in favour of the person so substituted. It only confers the right to represent the estate of the deceased in the pending proceedings- Referred to Jaladi Suguna v. Satya Sai Central Trust, (2008) 8 SCC 521 – Despite the limited purpose of substitution of legal representatives, it has its significance in as much as it gives the right to the substituted legal representatives to contest the claim of the deceased. (Para 10)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *