JUDGMENT The revision is directed against the order dated 4.8.93 of Addl. Distt - Judge Indore passed in M.C.C. No. 98/86 whereby the non-applicant No. 1 s application under order 22 Rule 4 CPC for being substituted as L.Rs. of Mahant Ramratan (since deceased) has been accepted. The undisputed facts of the case are that one Mahant Shri Sheshnarain das was the Mahant of Hansdas Math situated at Indore. He died somewhere in 1981. Thereafter Mahant Ramratan who claimed himself to be the disciple filed a suit against the present applicant and other persons restraining them from interference in the property of Hansdas Math earlier held by Sheshnarain das. That suit was registered as CS No. 55-N86 and was dismissed in default on 23.4.86. Thereafter an application for restoration of the suit was filed by Mahant Ramratan. During the pendency of that application for restoration of suit Mahant Ramratan died on 5.3.93. Thereafter present N. A. Ramcharan filed an application for substitution as L.Rs. of Mahant on the basis of a will allegedly executed by Mahant Ramratan and being the last will. It was also asserted that as per the custom also Ramcharan being the principal disciple of Mahant Ramratan would be the legal representative for representing the Estate of late Mahant. The present applicant filed an objection that has been overruled and application for substitution of N. A. Ramcharan Das has been accepted. Hence this Revision by the present applicant. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is a legatee of Mahant Shesh Narain Das and neither Mahant Ramratan Das the present N. A. Ramcharan das had any title or right of possession over the property of Hansdas Math. It has further been submitted that the finding of the trial Court is perverse. As against it learned counsel for N.A. has submitted that the main dispute about the right, title and interest is to be restored and chanted into the suit. At this stage this much is only to be seen as who is entitled to represent the Estate of Mahant Ramratan. The short question involved in the case is who should be allowed to represent the estate of Mahant Ramratan Das. At this stage this much is only to be seen as who is entitled to represent the Estate of Mahant Ramratan. The short question involved in the case is who should be allowed to represent the estate of Mahant Ramratan Das. In the application under order 22 R. 4 CPC this cannot be decided as to whether the present applicant is a disciple or a person entitled to manage the affairs of Hansdas Math. At this stage, the only point that is required to be seen is as to who is entitled to represent the estate of Mahant Ramratan after his death. The applicant does not claim in any way to be the heir of Mahant Ramratandas and therefore the revision against the order of substitution is uncalled for. Learned trial judge has accepted the will as proved by Ramcharan Das and further directed that he be substituted to represent the estate of Ramratan das. Any dispute of title between Mahant Ramratan and the present applicant will be a subject matter of dispute in a suit for title or injunction and not in this application for substitution. There does not appear to be any force in this revision. The revision is, therefore, dismissed with cost. Counsel fee Rs. 300/-.