Judgment :- This Civil Revision Petition arises out of the dismissal of an application under Order XXII Rule 3 of Civil Procedure Code. 2. The petitioners herein are the legal representatives of one M.Rajammal, who filed a suit in O.S.No.129 of 2006 against her brothers for partition and separate possession of certain properties. Pending suit, the sole plaintiff died on 111. 2007. The petitioners filed an application in I.A.No.1409 of 2007 for bringing them on record as legal representatives of the deceased sole plaintiff in the suit. That application was dismissed by the trial court, by an order dated 11.08.2008 on a hyper-technical ground. Therefore, the petitioners are before this Court. 3. Unfortunately, the court below, in para 7 of its order, has questioned the right of the deceased plaintiff to implead the District Collector and other revenue officials as parties to the suit. The petitioners were not responsible for the act of their mother. All that they wanted was, to step into the shoes of their mother, who was the sole plaintiff. The question of maintainability of the suit ought to have been taken up after bringing the petitioners on record as legal representatives. The failure of the court below to do that is improper. 4. Therefore, this civil revision petition is allowed. The order of the court below in I.A.No.1409 of 2007 dated 11.08.2008 is set aside and the application under Order XXII Rule 3 C.P.C. shall stand allowed. The petitioners are directed to carry out necessary amendment before the court below and the court below is directed to proceed further with the trial of the suit including the issue of maintainability and all other contentious issues. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected M.P.is closed.