ORDER : I.A. NO.I OF 2016 Mr. Y.V. Prakash, learned advocate, for Mr. Y.K. Narayana Sharma, appears for the respondent nos.1 to 5. 2. Mr. Kiran Kumar, learned advocate, appears for the respondent nos.6 to 8. 3. After hearing Mr. T.N. Raghupathy, learned advocate, in support of the application for condonation of delay of 41 days in filing the appeals, Mr. Y.V. Prakash, and Mr. Kiran Kumar, learned advocates for the respondent nos.1 to 5 and 6 to 8 respectively, we are satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the memorandum of appeals in time. 4. Therefore, the application seeking for condonation of delay, being I.A. No.I of 2016, stands allowed. 5. We make no order as to costs. 6. By the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, the matter is taken up for preliminary hearing. JUDGMENT 7. In an arbitral proceeding, the defendant no.1 died. An application was filed by the claimant to bring on record his natural heirs and legal representatives. 8. Simultaneously, an application was filed under Order XXII, rule 10, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the legatees, seeking their addition as parties, on the basis of a will allegedly executed by the defendant no.1. 9. The learned arbitrator allowed the application for substitution filed by the claimant, but rejected the application filed by the legatees under Order XXII, rule 10, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 10. A writ petition was filed. The Hon’ble Single Judge set aside the order passed by the Arbitral Tribunal and relegated the matter to the Tribunal, asking the Tribunal to make an enquiry under Order XXII, rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 11. With respect, neither the Tribunal nor the Hon’ble Single Judge was right. Where the defendant in any proceeding dies, leaving a will of which probate has not yet been obtained and the cause of action survives, the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased as on intestacy may be brought on record instead and in place of the deceased along with the executors named and appointed in the will or the legatees under the will. 12. Adjournment of the case till probate is obtained, or till an administrator pendentlite is appointed, is not the only course open. 13. 12. Adjournment of the case till probate is obtained, or till an administrator pendentlite is appointed, is not the only course open. 13. Therefore, we set aside the order passed by the Tribunal as well as that of the Hon’ble Single Judge, and direct substitution of both the natural heirs and the legatees claiming under the alleged will, instead of and in place of the deceased defendant no.1. 14. With the aforesaid directions, the appeals stand disposed of. 15. We make no order as to costs.