IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 4885 of 1999(O&M) Date of Decision: April 20, 2011. Mrs.Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus Indian Oil Corporation Limited. ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. M.L.Sarin, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kabir Sarin, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Advocate for the respondent. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) CM No.10044-CII of 2011 Requests for placing on record reply to CM No.14631-CII of 2005. The same is taken on record subject to all just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. CM No.14631-CII of 2005 CR No.4885 of 1999 An application under Order 22 Rules 3 and 11 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by Smt.Arti Nobbs for bringing her on record as LR of her deceased mother-Mrs.Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora, who had filed civil suit against respondent-Corporation giving rise to present revision petition on the ground that her deceased mother bequeathed the property in dispute by way of a Will dated 03.02.2004. It has also been stated that Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora had left behind Raj Kumar Aurora (son), Smt.Rita Jain (daughter) and Smt.Arti Nobbs (daughter) and that she is the only person to be impleaded as LR for deceased Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora on the basis of Will. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that though the present application has been filed under Order 22 Rules 3 and 11 of the CPC and however, the said provision is not applicable in this case as this is a revision petition and hence, the application be treated as under Section 151 CPC. Brief facts of the case are that, Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora had filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining defendant from terminating dealership of Indian Oil Corporation granted to her by respondent-Corporation vide agreement dated 14.04.1969 for running a petrol pump at Batala Road, Amritsar on the alleged ground of contravention of the dealership agreement and further restraining the defendant from forcibly occupying and taking possession of the land and the building of the petrol pump. During pendency of suit, an application under Section 34 of the Indian Arbitration Act was filed by respondent-Corporation on the plea that as per the agreement dispute was to be referred to the Arbitrator. The said 2 CR No.4885 of 1999 application was dismissed by learned trial Court. Respondent-Corporation filed appeal against the said order before learned District Judge, Amritsar and learned District Judge, Amritsar vide order dated 06.09.1999 accepted the same and allowed the said application and the proceedings in the suit instituted by the present petitioner were stayed. The present revision petition was filed by Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora against the said order passed in appeal by learned District Judge, Amritsar. During pendency of the revision petition Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora expired. The present application has been filed by her daughter, Smt.Arti Nobbs for impleading her as a party in this revision petition. It may be mentioned here that another application has been filed by Raj Kumar Arora i.e. son of Smt.Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora for impleading him as legal heir of his deceased mother and however, later on none appeared on his behalf. Application filed by Smt.Arti Nobbs for being impleaded as LR of Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora has been contested by respondent- Corporation on the ground that the same is not maintainable as after death of Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora right to sue by the LRs including the present applicant does not survive as it was a personal contract of allotment of a retail outlet dealership and that it was not heritable. It has been stated that Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora was allotted a retail outlet, in question, by the Indian Oil Corporation and after her death, the contract stood terminated in view of Section 201 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 as well. It has also been mentioned that legal heirs of deceased Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora were repeatedly asked by respondent-Corporation to submit fresh reconstitution proposal and however, they failed to submit any 3 CR No.4885 of 1999 such proposal as there was a dispute between various LRs of Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora and hence, it is stated that vide order dated 26.03.2008, retail outlet dealership, in question, was terminated. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon Jaladi Suguna (deceased) through LRs v. Satya Sai Central Trust and others, (2008) 8 SCC 521, wherein it was held by Hon’ble Apex Court that when right to sue survives, LRs of a deceased respondent have to be brought on record before the court can proceed further in the appeal. On the other hand, it has been contended by learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation that it was a personal contract of running a retail outlet dealership by Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora and that after her death the contract itself was terminated and hence, LRs of Smt.Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora are having no right to sue in the main suit. Hence, it is contended that when they are having no right to continue with the main suit, they are having no right to be impleaded as LRs in this revision petition and hence, the present revision petition does not survive and LRs of Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora are having no right to pursue the present revision petition further. There is force in the argument of learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation. It was a case of personal contract to run dealership in favour of Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora. A notice was issued to respondent-Corporation for termination of dealership of Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora, which was challenged by her in the civil suit, in which application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act was filed by the respondent-Corporation, which was dismissed by learned trial Court and 4 CR No.4885 of 1999 however, the same was allowed by first appellate Court vide impugned order against which the present revision petition has been filed. In view of the fact that LRs of Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora are having no right to sue in the main suit, they cannot be impleaded as a party in the present revision petition as LR of deceased- Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora. There is no merit in the application filed on behalf of Smt.Arti Nobbs for impleading her as LR of deceased petitioner- Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora. Hence, the present application is, hereby, dismissed. CR No.4885 of 1999 The present revision petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside impugned order dated 06.09.1999 passed by learned District Judge, Amritsar. In view of the fact that the application filed by Smt.Arti Nobbs for impleading her as LR of Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora has been dismissed as right to sue does not survive after death of petitioner- Smt. Kamla Arora @Sneh Lata Aurora, no order is required to be passed in the present revision petition when the right to sue in the main suit in which the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act was allowed giving rise to the present revision petition, does not survive. Hence, the present revision petition is disposed as having rendered infructuous. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) April 20, 2011. JUDGE 'om' 5