C.R.No.2880 of 2010 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.2880 of 2010 Date of Order: 21.1.2011 Smt Harbans Kaur .....Petitioner Vs. Jasbir Kaur and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Sumeet Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amit Kohar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Toor, Advocate for respondent No.1. JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) Defendant No.3-petitioner Harbans Kaur, who is admittedly natural mother of the deceased Manpreet Singh-defendant No.1 has assailed the order dated 26.2.2010 (P.7) by filing the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution whereby her application under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC for permission to represent the estate of the deceased has been dismissed. Briefly noticed, the facts of the case are that the plaintiff- respondent No.1 Jasbir Kaur had filed a suit for declaration that she is owner of the property described in the head note of the plaint to the extent of the share of her deceased husband Sarwan Singh with consequential relief of possession. The plea of the deceased-defendant No.1 Manpreet Singh was that he had been adopted by his uncle Sarwan Singh and her aunt Jasbir Kaur besides claiming to be owner in possession on the basis of a registered C.R.No.2880 of 2010 #2# will dated 15.4.1999 whereby his uncle Sarwan Singh-adoptive father had bequeathed his entire share in the property in his favour. The stand of defendant No.3-petitioner, who is the natural mother, is also the same. It is further apparent from the record that besides the application moved by defendant No.3, no other application has been moved for being impleaded as the legal representative of the deceased-defendant No.1. Learned counsel submits that the basis for declining the relief that the contradictory stand has been taken by the applicant-petitioner is wholly erroneous and not germane to the considerations under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC. On the other hand, learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent No.1 Jasbir Kaur in view of the fact that no such application has been preferred by her (Jasbir Kaur) submits that she would have no objection provided the stand already taken on behalf of deceased-Manpreet is not changed since the case is fixed at the final stage of hearing. Confronted with this argument, learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that no further change in the stand, as already taken in the written statement, shall be made. In view of the agreed stand, petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be impleaded as legal representative of the deceased Manpreet Singh to represent his estate. January 21, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE