MAHAVIR SINGH & ORS. vs PREMLATA & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~97 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 21st, August, 2025 + CM(M) 1119/2025 & CM APPL. 37938/2025 MAHAVIR SINGH & ORS. .....Petitioner Through: Mohit Khanna, Advocate along with petitioner no. 2 (Through VC) versus PREMLATA & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Abhay Mani Tripathy, Mr. Hemant Gulati and Mr. Bharat Kashyap, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Suit was instituted against one Mr. Rajbir Singh and the plaintiffs were seeking recovery of Rs. 11 lacs approximately from him. 2. However, before he could be served, unfortunately, he expired. 3. Plaintiffs, accordingly, moved an application seeking impleadment of his LRs and notice was duly sent to them. 4. Such LRs appeared before the learned Trial Court and participated in the proceedings and were asked to file written statement. 5. The direction in this regard is found to be recorded in order dated 15.05.2024. 6. Fact remains that since they did not file written statement, their right to file written statement was closed while also observing that they did not want to contest the suit. 7. The sole grievance of the petitioners i.e. LRs of deceased defendant is Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 1119/2025 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:23.08.2025 15:29:48 to the effect that though they had appeared in connection with application filed under Order XXII Rule 4 CPC, they were unable to file any written statement as they were never supplied with copy of the plaint and relevant documents. 8. If that was really so, ideally speaking, they should have immediately made appropriate request before the learned Trial Court apprising the learned Trial Court about the aforesaid vital aspect. Unfortunately, no such request was made and they merely sough