1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2978 OF 2008 1 Harischandra s/o Narayan Adsul, age: 63 years, Occ: Agril.; 2 Sow.Kashibai w/o Harischandra Adsul, age: 59 years, Occ: Agril. & Household, Both R/o Sai, Taluka and District Latur. Petitioners Versus 1 Khandu s/o Bhivrao Pawar, age: 48 years, Occ: Agril., 2 Prabhakar s/o Bhivrao Pawar, age: 55 years, Occ: Agril., All R/o Sai, Taluka and District Latur. Respondents Mr.S.B.Rohile, advocate for petitioners. Mr.M.P.Kale, advocate for Respondents . CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 03 rd December, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT: 1 Heard Shri S.B.Rohile, learned Counsel for petitioners and Shri M.P.Kale, learned Counsel for Respondents. Rule, made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties. 2 2 Rejection of application for bringing on record legal representatives of deceased defendant no.3-Sarubai in Regular Civil Suit No. 685/2005, by the trial Court, is subject matter of challenge in this petition. 3 Petitioners/plaintiffs presented suit claiming decree of recovery of possession against defendants / respondents herein. During continuance of the suit, defendant no.3 – Sarubai w/o Bhivrao Pawar died on 20.11.2006. An application was tendered by original plaintiffs / petitioners herein for bringing on record legal representatives of deceased defendant no.3. It was pointed out that defendants no.1 and 2 are sons of deceased defendant no. 3 – Sarubai, who are already on record. It was requested to the Court to take on record names of other two daughters Dagdubai and Kababai as legal representatives of deceased defendant no.3. Application tendered by plaintiffs was opposed by defendants contending that there is no prayer made in the application for setting aside abatement or for condoning delay occurred in presenting the application. 4 On perusal of the record, I find that there was delay of 65 days occurred in presenting the application. Delay has been explained in the application Exhibit-19 in paragraph 4. According to me, reasons set out in the application are sufficient for condoning delay of 65 days occurred in presenting the application. Considering nature of litigation, the trial Court ought to have taken a liberal view and ought to have permitted impleadment of legal representatives of deceased defendant no.3. In this view of the matter, writ petition needs to be allowed. 5 In the result, writ petition is allowed. Order passed by the trial 3 Court on 04.02.2008 below Exhibit-19 in Regular Civil Suit No.685/2005 is quashed and set aside. Plaintiffs/petitioners herein are permitted to take on record names of legal representatives of deceased defendant no.3. Suitable amendment be carried out within three weeks from today. Plaintiffs / petitioners herein shall deposit costs of Rs.1000/- before the trial Court within four weeks from today. On deposit of costs of Rs.1000/-, same be permitted to be withdrawn by original defendants no.1 and 2. Rule is accordingly made absolute. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* adb/wp297808