Rikhu Dev, Chela Bawa Harjug Dass v. Som Dass (Deceased) through His Chela Shiamdass
Case brief
What is this about?
Supreme Court, Civil Appeal No. 159 of 1974 (decided 28-08-1975; Mathew, J. for the Court, with A.N. Ray CJ and Y.V. Chandrachud J). Keywords: Order 22 rule 10 CPC; devolution of interest pendente lite; abatement of appeal; Order 22 rules 3 and 4; legal representatives vs successor; representative capacity; de jure mahant v. de facto mahant; election of successor mahant; mutt/temple head resignation or removal; trustee succession; leave of the Court to continue suit. Context: appeal from Punjab and Haryana High Court, R.S.A. No. 1482 of 1961 (order dated 4-4-1973); suit over Shiromani Nirankari Dera (Patiala) and branch Dera at Landeke. Useful when advising on suits by/against mahants, trustees, or mutt heads where the office-holder dies or leaves office mid-litigation and a successor is elected or appointed: cite for the position that such cases attract O. 22 r. 10 (continuation against the person on whom the interest devolved, with leave) rather than abatement under O. 22 rr. 3-4, and that elective succession effects devolution even though the successor's identity is uncertain at death. Precedents relied on: Ratnam Pillai (AIR 1924 Mad 615), Thirumalai (AIR 1926 Mad 540), Roshan Lal (AIR 1960 Punj 382).