AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
9 paragraphs · 191 wordsHeard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent no. 2 in both the matters in respect of M.A. Nos. 26 and 27 of 2020
through which respondent no. 2 has prayed for its deletion from the array of respondents on the ground that in the facts of the case it is neither a
necessary nor a proper party but it has been impleaded only because it is a rival MSO.
Learned counsel for the applicant/respondent no. 2 has placed reliance upon several orders passed in similar facts and circumstances in many other
petitions deleting respondent no. 2. One such order is dated 9.11.2021 passed in M.A. 76 of 2021 arising out of B.P. No. 107 of 2021. In the
facts of the case, the prayer for deletion is allowed.  M.A. Nos. 26 and 27 of 2020 are accordingly disposed of. Petitioner should file amended
memo of parties within three weeks. Already there is an order for ex-parte hearing qua respondent no. 1.
List the matter before the Court of Registrar on 4.3.2022 for passing necessary orders and directions to make the petitions ready for early
hearing. Â