Interim Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 35 CS DJ 564/24 Rani Massih Vs. Johny Massih And Ors
10.09.2026.
Present: Mr. Cheryl, Ld. Counsel for LRs of plaintiff.
Mr. George Tomes & Ms. Aradhana Singh, Ld. Counsel for
the defendant No. 1 alongwith defendant.
Mr. Narender Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the defendant Nos.
2,3 & 4.
Arguments on application under Order 22 Rule 3 CPC are
heard.
Put up for orders at 3:00 PM.
(Aanchal)
District Judge-03, Rohini Courts
North District, Delhi
10.09.2026(amt)
Present: None.
File is taken up for orders.
Vide this order, the present application under Order 22
Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC filed by applicant Jacab Massih
seeking substitution/impleadment as the legal representative of deceased
plaintiff namely Rani Massih, is being decided.
O R D E R
1. Arguments have been heard and the record has been carefully
perused.
2. Plaintiff Rani Massih expired on 11.12.2024 during the pendency
of the present suit. It is stated on behalf of applicant that the
deceased had executed a Will dated 03.12.2024, whereby she
bequeathed her properties, including the property in question to
applicant. On the basis of the said Will, substitution of the
concerned legal representative has been sought.
3. The application has been opposed by defendants. The main
ground of opposition is that the Will is not genuine or false. The
execution and genuineness of the Will have been disputed and it
-- 1 of 4 --
-2-
has been alleged that the Will is a forged and fabricated
document. It has also been stated that the deceased was paralysed
and confined to bed shortly prior to her death and, therefore, the
alleged Will could not have been validly executed. The defendant
has, however, expressed willingness to bear the expenses for
examination/checking of the said Will.
4. This Court has given thoughtful consideration to the contentions
made. At the stage of proceedings under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC,
the Court is primarily concerned with bringing on record the
person(s) who are required to represent the estate of the deceased
defendant for the purposes of continuation of the proceedings.
The question of final entitlement to the estate or the ultimate
validity of the Will is not required to be conclusively adjudicated
at this stage.
5. In the present case, the Will dated 03.12.2024 has been placed on
record and the claim of the applicant/legal representative is
founded upon the said Will. The objection of defendants
essentially goes to the genuineness, validity and execution of the
Will, which are matters to be adjudicated at the appropriate
stage/proceedings and cannot, by themselves, constitute a ground
to bring the proceedings to a standstill. The only purpose of
Order 22 Rule 3 CPC is to bring on record the legal
representatives for conducting the legal proceedings in a
particular case but it does not decide the interse dispute between
the rival legal heirs. Legal Representatives for purpose of Order
22 Rule 3 CPC does not mean legal heir. It only implies that the
applicants could be legally allowed to proceed with the present
-- 2 of 4 --
-3-
suit but it does not determine the question of validity of the will in
any manner. This proposition is well propounded by Hon’ble
Apex Court in Binapani Kar Chowdhury Vs. Sri Satyabrata Basu
& Anr, AIR 2006, Supreme Court 2263, in following words :-
‘5. Therefore, where the right of either an executor or a
legatee under a Will is in issue, such right can be
established only where probate (where an executor has
been appointed under the Will) or letters of
administration (where no executor is appointed under
a Will) have been granted by a competent court.
Section 213 does not come in the way of a suit or
action being instituted or presented by the executor or
the legatee claiming under a Will. Section 213,
however, bars a decree or final order being made in
such suit or action which involves a claim as an
executor or a legatee, in the absence of a Probate or
Letters of Administration in regard to such a will.
Where the testator had himself filed a suit (seeking a
declaration and consequential reliefs) and he dies
during the pendency of the suit, the executor or legatee
under his will, can come on record as the legal
representative of the deceased plaintiff under Order 22
Rule 3 CPC and prosecute the suit. Section 213 does
not come in the way of an executor or legatee being so
substituted in place of the deceased plaintiff, even
though at the stage of such substitution, probate or
letters of administration has not been granted by a
competent court.’.
In Suresh Kumar Bansal vs Krishna Bansal & Anr , AIR 2010
SUPREME COURT 344, Hon’ble Apex Court has held
that:-
“It is now well settled that determination of the
question as to who is the legal representatives of
the deceased plaintiff or defendant under Order
XXII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure is
only for the purposes of bringing legal
representatives on record for the conducting of
those legal proceedings only and does not operate
as res judicata and the inter se dispute between
the rival legal representatives has to be
independently tried and decided in probate
proceedings. “.
-- 3 of 4 --
-4-
Hence, it is very clear that there is no bar for bringing the
applicant on record as LRs for deceased plaintiff on the basis of
Will despite the fact that the Will is disputed by the defendant no.
2.
6. Thus, the objections raised by defendants relate to the merits and
validity of the Will and the same cannot be conclusively
determined in the present application. The substitution at this
stage shall only facilitate continuation of the present proceedings
and shall not amount to adjudication or declaration of the validity
of the Will or final title/succession rights of the parties.
7. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present application under
Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC is allowed. Mr. Jacob
Massih, nephew of the plaintiff, as sought in the application, is
hereby brought on record/substituted in her place. Amended
Memo of parties is hereby taken on record.
It is clarified that the present order shall not be construed as an
expression of opinion on the genuineness, validity or due
execution of the Will dated 03.12.2024, nor shall it prejudice the
rights/contentions of the parties in respect thereof.
Now, put up for further proceedings on 18.02.2027.
(Aanchal)
District Judge-03, Rohini Courts
North District, Delhi
10.09.2026(amt)
-- 4 of 4 --