CR No. 7735 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No. 7735 of 2010 Date of decision:- 29.11.2010 Sukhi Ram ......petitioner vs. Puran Singh and others ......respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: - Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J (ORAL) Plaintiff is the petitioner before this Court who has filed the suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 12.7.2004 alleged to be executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of the plaintiff. As per the plaintiff, defendant No. 1 has died and his legal representatives have been brought on record vide order dated 26.8.2009. It is said order which has been challenged by the petitioner before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the said legal representatives have claimed interest in the suit property on the basis of the decree in their favour suffered by Dalip-defendant No. 1 and the Will executed by the said defendant. It is contended that the decree is not registered nor the Will has been probated, therefore, the applicants cannot claim to be the legal representatives so as to seek impleadment in the present suit for specific performance. I do not find any merit in the present revision petition. In terms of the Section 2 (11) of the Civil Procedure Code, the legal representative is CR No. 7735 of 2010 -2- a person who in law represents the estate of a deceased person, and includes an intermeddler with the estate of the deceased. Thus, the applicant who is claiming interest on the basis of the Will has a right to defend the deceased in the suit. The question whether the estate of the deceased vests on him is not required to be examined in the present suit in a summary manner. The question of inhe\ritance of the estate of the deceased-defendant is required to be examined in an independent proceedings. In view of the above, I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the orders passed by the learned trial Court which may warrant any interference in the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. Revision stands dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 29.11.2010 preeti