legal heirs on record. The learned counsel for the applicant, who is original defendant, contends that the deceased had only limited rights in the property in view of Section 14(2) of the Hindu Succession Act and, therefore, her legal heirs did not get any right in the property and, therefore, defendant no.1 being adopted son of the original owner Nana is entitled to get the property. This question can be looked into at the time of the trial of the suit. Prima-facie, it appears that the deceased plaintiff Sonabai had received the property in lieu of the maintenance, which was her existing right and, therefore, her case may be covered under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act. If it is so, her daughters and her deceased daughter’s son may be entitled to succeed to that property. Taking into consideration valuable rights in the suit property, it will not be in the interest of justice to refuse to condone the delay in filing the application for bringing legal heirs on record. The trial Court has considered all the aspects while granting the application and because of the delay, it has also imposed cost. I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. In fact, order appears to be in the interest of justice.
