ORDER 22 RULE 3 & 4 CPC

Hello friends, today we shall talk about the provisions of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 which facilitates the process of substituting the legal heirs of the deceased plaintiff or defendant.

Suppose a person instituted a civil case, and during the pendency of the said case, he/she died. In such a scenario, the case shall continue, and the legal heir of the person can be substituted. However, this can be done by filing an application under the provisions of Order 22 Rule 3 CPC, and praying before the Court that the mentioned legal heirs be substituted in place of original plaintiff.

Similarly, when a person against whom a case is filed, dies during the pendency, in such an event, he can be also substituted and the same can be done by filing an appropriate application under the provisions of Order 22 Rule 4 CPC.

The point to remember here is that the aforesaid application is to be filed within a maximum period of 3 months from the date of death or from the date of knowledge of death. In case the said application is not filed within the period of 90 days, the same shall be liable for rejection / dismissal.

I hope the information shared above will be helpful. In case of any queries, please feel free to share your views in the comment section.

Comments

Parental disputes or pending matrimonial and criminal matters between the natural guardians cannot constitute a valid statutory reason for refusal to issue passport says Allahabad High Court

Facts and Background The case involved a minor child aged about 2 years at the time of application whose mother applied for her passport on January 17, 2025. Despite completing all required formalities, the passport authorities kept the application pending indefinitely. The reason cited was the ongoing matrimonial dispute and criminal cases between the child's parents (the natural guardians). The authorities essentially treated these parental conflicts as a ground to withhold progress on the minor's passport application. The mother approached the Allahabad High Court via a writ petition, seeking directions for expeditious processing and issuance. Observations of the Court Section 6 is Exhaustive and Mandatory Section 6 of the Passports Act, 1967, provides the complete and exclusive list of grounds on which a passport authority may refuse to issue a passport or travel document. - These grounds include matters like: ...

MARRIAGE REGISTRATION PROCESS IN DELHI

Hello friends today we shall talk about the procedure for registration of marriage in Delhi. ELIGIBILITY The marriage must have been solemnized either under the Hindu Marriage Act or under the Special Marriage Act, The Groom must have attained the minimum age of 21 years. The bride must be of the age of 18 years at least. DOCUMENTS REQUIRED Photo ID proofs of both the parties like Aadhar card / PAN card / Voter card Date of birth proofs of both parties like 10 th certificate, etc. Permanent address proof must be there . Marriage photographs and Invitation Card. Passport Size Photographs of both parties. 2 witness in case marriage registered under Hindu Marriage Act or 3 witnesses in case it is registered under the Special Marriage Act along with their respective proofs like PAN CARD/ AADHAR CARD etc. An affidavit from both parties certifying the date of their marriage and more specifically stating that the marriage has not been performed between pers...

DISTRICT COURT THRISSUR, KERALA HELD AIR ASIA LIABLE FOR DEFICIENCY IN SERVICE AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES

Introduction District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Thrissur, Kerala (India), held AirAsia India Limited liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practices. Facts and Background In this matter, a passenger's flight was cancelled by the airline for operational reasons. Under applicable rules (including those from India's Directorate General of Civil Aviation or DGCA, and the Consumer Protection Act), passengers are typically entitled to a full refund in such cases, and many airlines (including low-cost carriers like AirAsia) are expected to process automatic refunds promptly without requiring manual claims in straightforward cancellations. However, AirAsia failed to issue an automatic refund for the ticket amount (which was ₹2,983). The passenger made repeated attempts to obtain the refund but faced ongoing issues and harassment, ultimately having to approach the consumer forum to recover even this small sum. This caused financial loss, inconvenience, a...

WakeelSaab.in

Search This Blog