IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.717 of 2009 BHAGIRATH SAHNI & ORS Versus HARI RAI & ANR ----------- 2/ 13.05.2009 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The prayer of the petitioners to be impleaded as a party in the Probate proceedings being carried on by the Additional District Judge – F.T.C. III, Muzaffarpur in Probate Case no. 10 of 1997 was rejected by the impugned order dated 4.2.2009 on the ground that the petitioners’ impleadment was not permissible under law because his case of acquiring the title and interest in the property covered by a deed of will could not be gone into in the probate proceedings. The court does not dispute the finding recorded by the learned judge that the question of title may not be decided by a court which is called upon to grant probate of a will in favour of one particular party. But impleadment could not be only for adjudication of title or interest of a person, in a proceeding of the nature which is being carried on by the court below; it could be necessary by one reason that the person may object to the prayer of the will being probated in favour of the petitioners. If the court below could be consulting the definition of “legal representative” as defined in section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure, it could have come to a conclusion that the petitioners could be the legal representative of Ram Dulari Devi who sold some part of the property covered by the will in question way back in the year 1995 to the petitioners. It has been submitted that Aklu Rai left - 2 - behind his widow Lachhminia Devi who had a daughter Ram Dulari Devi who inherited the entire property of her father and sold a part of the same to the petitioners by a deed of sale in 1995. It was for the purposes of hearing objection of the petitioners that it was necessary to implead him as one of the respondents in the probate proceedings. In the result, this Civil Revision is allowed with a direction to the court below to implead the petitioners namely Bhagirath Sahni, Ram Prabesh Sahni and Chhotelal Sahni as respondents in the Probate Case no. 10 of 1997. Anil/ (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)