Forfeiture order against a deceased person is void where legal representatives were not heard; matter remitted for fresh consideration.

A forfeiture order passed against a person who had already died, without impleading his legal representatives, is a nullity in law. Because the proceedings affected property rights belonging to the deceased estate, the legal representatives were entitled to be heard before any final decision was taken. The absence of substitution created a fundamental procedural defect, so the order could not be sustained. The forfeiture order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Competent Authority for fresh consideration after hearing the legal representatives.

---

---

Issues: Whether an order of forfeiture passed against a person who had already died, without impleading his legal representatives, is a nullity and liable to be set aside, with the matter remitted for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The affected person had died before the Competent Authority passed the forfeiture order, and the legal representatives had not been brought on record before the decision was made. An order made against a dead person cannot stand in law. Since the proceedings concerned property rights of the deceased and his legal representatives had a right to be heard, the order suffered from a fundamental infirmity and could not be upheld.

Conclusion: The forfeiture order was invalid and was set aside. The matter was remitted to the Competent Authority for fresh after hearing the legal representatives.

---