TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 1282X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sary party because the act of the respondent No. 1 gave only a cause of action to the respondent No. 2, who was an affected party, who approached the Single Judge by way of W.P. No. 5993/2021, which passed the order in favour of the respondent No. 2. It cannot be held that the petitioner was an essential party before the writ Court, as he was in no way concerned or affected by the impugned order which was challenged in the writ petition passed by respondent No. 1 against the respondent No. 2 - the relief, if any, is available to the petitioner before the civil court where a civil suit is already pending where he is the defendant. Petition dismissed. - Review Petition No. 801 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 22-2-2021 - Atul Sreedharan And An ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent No. 1 challenged the said order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.A. No. 767/2021, which was heard and upheld by a reasoned order and the appeal filed by the respondent No. 1 was dismissed. The petitioner herein was never a party either in the writ petition or in the writ appeal. He has appeared before this Court today in this review petition saying that he was a necessary party as he is the owner of the land and he had terminated the lease. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the complaint filed by the petitioner whereby he intimated the respondent No. 1, about the cancellation of the lease-deed executed by him. The same has been referred to in the show cause notice dated 31.12.2020 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 32, a review petition and a recall petition. It further goes on to hold that in a review petition the Court was only to consider on merits where there is an error apparent on the face of the record. However, in a recall petition the Supreme Court held that it does not go into the merits but simply recalls an order which was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to an affected party. This petition is a review petition. The petitioner has been unable to reveal before us any apparent error on the face of record. As regards the question whether he is a person affected because of the impugned order passed by the respondent No. 1 against respondent No. 2, the answer is that the petitioner herein was never a necessary party because t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
