RFA No. 206 of 2011 4.9.2020 Present: Mr. Rupinder Singh Thakur, Advocate, for the applicants/appellants, through video conferencing. M/s. Sudhir Bhatnagar and Arvind Sharma, Addl. Advocates General and for the non- applicants/respondents No.1 to 3,through video conferencing. CMP No. 7625 of 2020 By way of instant application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC, prayer has been made on behalf of applicant-proposed proforma respondent No.6(a)-Rajender Singh for deletion of name of proforma respondent No.6, Nanki Devi, who has expired on 4.3.2008, as is evident from death certificate, Annexure A-2. Learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions, states that no reply is intended to be filed on behalf of non applicants/respondents No.1 to 3. He further states that non applicants/respondents No.1 to 3 shall have no objection in case prayer made in the application is allowed. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record, this Court finds that proforma respondent No.6, Nanki Devi, before her death executed Will dated 26.2.2002, whereby she bequeathed her entire estate in the name of Rajender Singh. It further emerges from the record that on the basis of aforesaid Will, her estate in question, stands recorded in the name of applicant in the revenue -2- record, as is evident from copy of Jamabandi, Annexure A-3. For the aforesaid reasons, application filed by applicant/proposed respondent No.6(a) deserves to be allowed and accordingly applicant/respondent No.6(a)-Rejender Singh, is ordered to be substituted in place of deceased respondent No.6-Nanki Devi. Registry is directed to carry out necessary correction in the memo of parties on the basis of amended memo of parties. Since person ordered to be substituted in place of deceased proforma respondent No.6 is being represented by Mr. Rupinder Singh Thakur, Advocate, there is no necessity to issue notice. The application stands disposed of. CMP No. 128 of 2020 By way of instant application filed under Section 151 CPC, prayer has been made on behalf of applicant/respondents No.6(a), Rajender Singh for release of award amount lying deposited in the Registry of this Court qua the share of deceased respondent No.6-Nanki Devi. Despite repeated opportunities no reply has been filed on behalf of non applicant/respondents. Learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions, states that no reply is intended to be filed on behalf of non-applicant/respondent-State and it shall have no objection in case prayer made in the application is allowed. -3- Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record, this Court finds that deceased proforma respondent No.6-Nanki Devi before her death on 4.3.2008, as is evident from the death certificate, executed Will bequeathing her entire estate in favour of applicant- respondent No.6(a)-Rajinder Singh. It further emerges from the record that pursuant to aforesaid Will executed by deceased Nanki Devi in favour of respondent No.6(a), who otherwise happens to be her great grandson, name of respondent No. 6(a) stands incorporated in the revenue record, as is evident from Jamabandi Annexure A-3. Perusal of Jamabandi as referred above, clearly reveals that natural legal heirs of proforma respondent No.6-Nanki Devi are also recorded as land owner qua the land in question but since land belonging to deceased proforma respondent No.6-Nanki Devi has been bequeathed in favour of applicant-respondent No.6(a) by way of Will, prayer made in the application at hand deserves to be allowed. Consequently, in view of above, present application is allowed and Registry is directed to release the award amount falling in the share of deceased respondent No.6-Nanki Devi in favour of applicant/respondent No.6(a)-Rajender Singh by remitting the same in his saving bank account, details of which -4- are given in para 6 of the application. The application stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge 4th September, 2020 (Guleria)