IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 5108 of 2010 Date of Decision: 10.11.2010 Harbhajan Singh .... Petitioner Versus Dial Singh and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. Manish Prabhaker, Advocate for the petitioner 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 11.6.2010 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Patti whereby an application to implead LRs of defendant No. 10 was dismissed. The plaintiff has filed suit for declaration against the defendants. Other defendants filed written statement saying suit has been filed against the dead person i.e. defendants No. 10 and 13 who had died prior to the filing of the suit. Thereafter, issues were framed both the parties have led their respective evidence. When the case was fixed for rebuttal evidence, the plaintiff herein has moved an application saying defendant No. 10 has died and her LRs should be substituted. Learned trial Court has rejected the application of the plaintiff saying infact defendant No. 10 had expired prior to the filing of the suit and plaintiff has moved this application with intention to C.R. No. 5108 of 2010 2 de novo trial. In the opinion of this Court, substitution of LRs can be permitted when party to the suit dies during the pendency of the suit. However, provisions of Order 22 can not be invoked when party to the suit had expired before the filing of the suit. Suit against the dead person is nullity, hence, there is no question of impleadment of LRs of dead person. I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. Dismissed. (ALOK SINGH) 10.11.2010 JUDGE reena