IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 607 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: January 29, 2010 Gurcharan Singh. … Petitioner Versus Pritam Singh and others. ..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND Present: Mr. Anil Kumar Garg, Advocate, for the petitioner. S.D. Anand, J. Decree holder – Surjit Singh died during the pendency of the execution application. He was a bachelor. His two brothers, namely, Malkiat Singh and Pritam Singh filed a plea for being impleaded as his legal representatives. The further averment, in the context, was that their mother was already dead and there was no other legal representative of the deceased except them. The grant of that plea was conceded by the leaned counsel, appearing on behalf of the J.D. No.1 therein. Petitioner herein is the successor in interest/attorney of deceased J.D. – Swarnjit Singh. He filed a plea before the learned Executing Court for dismissal of the execution application for want of a C.R. No. 607 of 2010 succession certificate. It was also the plea raised by him that all the legal representatives of the deceased had not been impleaded. The plea was declined by the learned Executing Court on the premise that the challenge to maintainability of the execution application could not be raised in view of the fact that the legal representatives of the deceased decree holder had been ordered to be brought on record on the concession of the counsel for J.D. No.1 therein. The Executing Court did not find any force in the plea that the execution application was not maintainable in the absence of a succession certificate. I find the reasoning recorded by the learned Trial Judge to be absolutely in order. There is plethora of law on the point that even one legal representative is sufficient to represent the estate of the deceased. Further, there is no law providing that the obtaining of a succession certificate is a condition precedent to the maintainability of an execution application of the indicated category. The petition is held to be force and is ordered to be dismissed. January 29, 2010 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 2