This order approves the inclusion of a proposed Respondent as a necessary party in Writ Petitions concerning temple land ownership and directs registry amendment.
Order directed addition of proposed Respondent as necessary party and registry amendment for a fresh hearing.
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.
W.M.P. No. 122 of 2020 and W.P. No. 35127 of 2019
W.M.P. No. 122 of 2020 in W.P. No. 35127 of 2019
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.
Since it is represented that the land belongs to a Temple,
the proposed Respondent is a necessary party to decide the Writ Petition.
W.M.P. No. 122 of 2020 and W.P. No. 35127 of 2019
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.
ssi/dm
W.M.P. No. 122 of 2020
in
W.P. No. 35127 of 2019
Dated : 09.01.2020 1/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the proposed Respondent, as a landlord of the alleged temple land, must be made a necessary party to the Writ Petition.
Application of Article/Section 227(a) regarding parties necessary for the determination of the petition.
Petitioner(s)
Respondent
P.D. Audikesavalu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
