2025:UHC:8254 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Civil Revision No. 37 of 2012 16 September, 2025 1. Narendra Singh Bagdwal 2: Virendra Singh Bagdwal --Revisionist Versus Smt. Kuldeep Kaur and others --Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------- Present- Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned counsel for the revisionists. Mr. Rajesh Joshi, learned counsel for the respondents -------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. The instant civil revision is old one, preferred in the year 2012 but not admitted so far. Instant civil revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 18.04.2012 passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court Act/ Addl. District Judge/ I F.T.C. Haldwani in SCC Suit No. 05 of 2007, Narendra Singh and another (Haripriya [since deceased]) vs Smt. Kuldeep Kaur and others (Sri Amreek Singh [deceased]) whereby application nos. 69C, 17C and 85C were rejected. In fact, by the order impugned the application moved by the revisionist being plaintiff in SCC suit no. 05 of 2007 was rejected whereby the plaintiff/revisionist wants to substitute the legal heirs of Late Amreek Singh (the defendant). The substitution application was time barred and the same was rejected on the ground that there is no proper explanation of delay. 1 2025:UHC:8254 2. In the SCC suit, the sole plaintiff Haripriya was also died and thereafter her grandsons, namely, Narendra Singh Bagdwal and Virendra Singh Bagdwal were arrayed as plaintiffs who are revisionists herein. In the instant revision respondent no. 1 Smt. Kuldeep Kaur, wife of Amreek Singh was arrayed as one of the respondent though she was never been substituted in the SCC suit, now she is no more. 3. The counsel for the revisionist submits that she was wrongly impleaded as respondent. 4. The submission as advanced by the learned counsel for the revisionist was opposed by Mr. Rajesh Joshi, learned counsel for the respondents by submitting that for impleading the daughters of late Smt. Kuldeep Kaur being legal heirs the revisionist moved substitution application no. 15789 of 2019 which is wholly misconceived since Smt. Kuldeep Kaur was never been arrayed as defendant in the suit, being legal heir of original defendant Late Amreek Singh 5. In response to this, Mr. Parihar, learned counsel for the revisionist submits that all the respondents herein were sought to be substituted by moving substitution application before the SCC court but the same was rejected which is under challenge. He also apprise to this Court that respondent no. 1, wife of Amreek Singh, already died therefore at this juncture since respondent nos. 2 and 3 who are sons of Amreek Singh are already arrayed as respondents, therefore, there is no need to substitute any legal heirs therefore application for substituting Smt. Kuldeep Kaur is not being pressed. 2 2025:UHC:8254 6. Since, now the legal heirs of Amreek Singh who were sought to be substituted in the SCC suit are arrayed as respondents herein, and, apart from this substitution application was rejected merely on the technical grounds without touching the merits of the case, therefore, in such an eventuality the impugned order dated 18.04.2012 is liable to be set aside. 7. Consequently, the civil revision is allowed and the impugned order dated 18.04.2012 passed by the Judge, SCC/1st FTC, Haldwani in SCC Suit No. 05 of 2007, Narendra Singh and anr. (Haripriya {since deceased}) vs. Smt. Kuldeep Kaur and others (Sri Amreek Singh {since deceased}) is set aside and the application moved before the SCC Court for substituting the legal heirs of Late Amreek Singh is also allowed. The legal heirs as sought to be substituted are substituted in the SCC suit. Since, the suit is pending since 2007, the trial court is directed to expedite the suit as early as possible preferably within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order 8. All pending applications are disposed of. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) Parul 3