High Court of Chhattisgarh quashed the trial Court order allowing impleading of a party who had no legal relationship or claim against the petitioners in a specific performance suit.
Order passed by the Additional District Judge impleading respondent No.2 was quashed; pending applications disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
^
BEFORE THE HON'B^E HI6H COURT OF CHHATIS6ARH AT BILASPUR ""."-s;' ;U.<~'i ^•^" v^ 'S ."s'^ .•.-;^fl—..._^^ .- WP[,ej(227) N0...^.^....,.12.
Petitioner/Plaintiffs:
- Satya Dev Pandey, S/o Late Teja Prasad Pandey, Aged about 6^ years,
R/o Old Bus ^fand Bilaspur, Bilaspur Dist
^•'^L^
....-•-•^^^'
.^••••^^•••^A^ ».W--" .cAO-'
^^^^>-1
?<*s"'....-
rff""
c.6.5tate ^f5°ol
Imliupara,
Bilaaspur, Bilaspur Dist, C& State. tiffw^
Versus
Respondents/Defendants.:
(Present address;
C/o Anupam Robinson, Behind Civil Line Thana,
Masangunj,
Bilaspur, C6 State.) WS°°\
CeState. Lfq5'°ol
L
Aged about 40 years, Galli No.R/2 Vinobha Nagar, Bilaspur, (The& Eiist Bilaspur) C6 State. W5'sc''
WRITPETITIQN UNDER ARTICL6 Z27 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APROPRIATE WRIT(S1 / OR&ER (S) / bIREOCTEON (S), ETC.
1. PARTICULABS-QEJI-lt:-B'"
u
c >
HI6H COURT OF CHHATras6ARH. BILASPUR (Sinqle Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma. J)
| W. | P. f2 | 27) N0.856/Z012 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Petitioners | 1. | Satya Dev Pandey | |
| Plaintiffs | Vs | 2. | br. Krishna Pratap Pandey |
| Respondents | 1. | Kiran Kant Robinson | |
| Defendants | 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. |
Gurmit Singh Bhatia Shri Ashok Paliwal Ravi Prakash Sharma Registrar / Collector of Stamps, Janjgir- Champa StateofC.6. |
Present;
Mr. K.R. Nair, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate for the respondents No.l.
Mr. H.S. Patel, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Sanjay S Agrawal, Advocate for the respondents No.2.
Mr. Anup Mazumdar, Advocate for the respondent No.3.
None for the respondent No.4.
Ms. Sangeeta Mishra, P.L. for the respor.dent No.5 & 6.
ORDER
Y>^
Page 2 of2
W.P.(227)No.856/12
in favour of respondent No.2, therefore, for just decision of the case he is necessary party.
Sd/T.P.Sharma Judge
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a person who has no claim or relief against the petitioner is a necessary party to the suit.
Whether the trial Court exceeded its jurisdiction in allowing the application for impleading under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC.
Whether the order allowing impleading is liable to be quashed under Article 227.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Satya Dev Pandey
Dr. Krishna Pratap Pandey
Kiran Kant Robinson
Gurmit Singh Bhatia
Shri Ashok Paliwal
Ravi Prakash Sharma
T.P. Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
