NDLI: Yashpal Jain Vs. Sushila Devi & Others

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Suit
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Others
Headnote	Issue for consideration: Whether the impugned order passed quashing the order dated 13.12.2012 rendered in Civil Revision by the High Court whereby the order dated 09.05.2012 passed by trial court allowing the impleadment application filed by the appellant had been rejected, to be sustained or set aside; whether any further directions require to be issued for concluding the proceedings in a time bound manner on account of the suit pending for trial for past 41 years? Suit – Suit was instituted by the original plaintiff in 1982 to declare the sale deed executed by first defendant in favour of defendants No.4 to 32 in respect of the suit properties, to be null and void and for a decree of possession of the suit properties – Proceedings protracted from 1982 till her demise in 2007 whereafter, several orders were passed by the courts below, both in original jurisdiction and revisional jurisdiction – Impugned order resulted in rejection of the application filed by the appellant to be brought on record as legal representative of the deceased plaintiff – Sustainability:Held: Not sustainable – On facts, respondents herein themselves having filed an application in WP (M/S) No.342 of 2005 for bringing the present appellant as the plaintiff’s legal representative in the aforesaid writ petition and prosecuted the same, reflects that they were in the acquaintance of the fact of the present appellant being the legal representative of deceased plaintiff but yet are attempting to contend that ‘MKJ’ is to be brought on record as legal representative of the deceased plaintiff – Further, the defendants cannot be heard to contend that appellant herein had filed two affidavits (Annexure P-5 and Annexure P-7) whereunder he had admitted ‘MKJ’ as the legal representative of deceased plaintiff and as such he cannot turn around to assert himself to be the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff, as the affidavits filed by the appellant does not even remotely suggest or indicate that he had admitted ‘MKJ’ being the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff – On the other hand, said affidavits clearly indicate that he had only affirmed and reiterated the fact that he is a signatory to the Will and nothing more or nothing less – Furthermore, ‘MKJ’ himself had filed an application, accompanied by affidavit before the Revisional Court in Civil Revision No.2 of 2010, stating that he would not press the application filed by him for substitution – This was sufficient for the High Court to have accepted the plea of the appellant or in other words, it should have sustained the order of trial court and ordered for appellant being brought on record as legal representative of deceased plaintiff – Impugned order set aside – Order dated 09.05.2012 passed by the Trial Court as affirmed in Civil Revision No.4 of 2012 vide order dated 13.12.2012, affirmed – Further directions issued – Judicial Delay . [Paras 12, 14-16]Directions by Supreme Court – Judicial Delay – Certain litigations initiated more than 50 years back still pending – Data from National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), three oldest civil and criminal cases noted – Factors behind Judicial Delays, enumerated – Steps taken to curb Judicial delay, historical outlook – Reasons for delay in civil trial – Discussed – Case Flow Management System Rules – Chief Justices of High Courts where said Rules are yet to be framed, requested to take immediate steps to formulate such rules – State-wise pendency of cases before the respective High Courts and overall Civil Courts as on 16.10.2023; stage-wise pendency also stated – Requests made to the Chief Justices of the High Courts – Directions issued to the trial courts to ensure that speedy justice is delivered – Further directions for implementation of the said directions to be issued from time to time, if necessary – Secretary General to circulate the copy of this judgment to the Registrar General of all the High Courts for being placed before the respective Chief Justices for consideration and suitable steps being taken. [Paras 18, 19, 21-26, 27-31, 33, 34]
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aravind Kumar
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 948
Petitioner	Yashpal Jain
Respondent	Sushila Devi & Others
SCR	[2023] 15 S.C.R. 948
Judgement Date	2023-10-20
Case Number	4296

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Yashpal Jain Vs. Sushila Devi & Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Sushila Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Kaushalya Devi and Others Vs. Baijnath Sayal and Others

Sushila Tiwary and Others Vs. Allahabad Bank and Others

Sushila Devi and Anr. Vs. Hari Singh and Ors.

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Smt. Sushila Devi and Ors.

Gothamchand Jain Vs. Arumugam @ Tamilarasan

Sudershan Devi and Anr. Vs. Sushila Devi and Anr.

Hukumchand Gulabchand Jain Vs. Fulchand Lakhmichand Jain and Others

Sushila Devi Etc. Vs. State of Haryana and Anr.

Yashpal Jain Vs. Sushila Devi & Others

Yashpal Jain Vs. Sushila Devi & Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Sushila Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Kaushalya Devi and Others Vs. Baijnath Sayal and Others

Sushila Tiwary and Others Vs. Allahabad Bank and Others

Sushila Devi and Anr. Vs. Hari Singh and Ors.

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Smt. Sushila Devi and Ors.

Gothamchand Jain Vs. Arumugam @ Tamilarasan

Sudershan Devi and Anr. Vs. Sushila Devi and Anr.

Hukumchand Gulabchand Jain Vs. Fulchand Lakhmichand Jain and Others

Sushila Devi Etc. Vs. State of Haryana and Anr.

Yashpal Jain Vs. Sushila Devi & Others