JUDGMENT Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. 2. This revision is directed against the order dated 16.03.2012 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Hardwar, in Suit No. 63 of 2009 whereby said court has dismissed the substitution application No. 55A moved on behalf of the revisionists for substitution of legal heirs on plaintiff No.2. 3. Perusal of the plaint shows that the suit was filed by Vilas Rai Charitable Trust, and its trustee Shyamlal. From the application 55A moved before the trial court it appears that Shyamlal, who was trustee of plaintiff No.1 Vilas Rai Dharmarth Trust, has died. The trial court has rejected the application of substitution moved by Vinod Mahendru and Suneel Mahendru, sons of Shyamlal (plaintiff No.2) to get substituted in place of their father Shyamlal, who died on 29.01.2011. 4. Learned counsel for the defendants/respondents pleaded that in respect of the suit filed on behalf of a trust, it is only trustee who can prosecute the same. It is further pointed out that plaintiff No.2 Shyamlal was prosecuting the suit as trustee of the trust (plaintiff No.2), which is apparent copy of the plaint. 5. Undoubtedly, merely for the reason that the revisionists are natural heirs of the trustee, they have no right to be substituted in place of a trustee, unless they are trustees or the trust property. As such, the trial court appears to have committed no error of law in rejecting the application 55A moved by the revisionists for their substitution. 6. In the above circumstances, this revision is dismissed summarily with the observation that if fresh substitution application is moved by any of the trustees either appointed before or after the death of Shyamlal, including the revisionists, the trial court may consider the same in accordance with law.