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
5 paragraphs · 218 wordsAs prayed four weeks' further time is granted for filing rejoinder to the replies of respondent no. 1 in BP Nos. 293, 295, 296 and 297 of 2021. Further time shall be on appropriate costs.
Heard learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and learned counsel for petitioner in respect of preliminary objections raised on behalf of respondent no. 2 against his impleadment in these petitions. Such objection in the reply is on the ground that respondent no. 2, a rival MSO of the petitioner is neither a necessary nor a proper party in the facts and circumstances available on record.
Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 has relied on several orders passed by this Tribunal deleting respondent no. 2 in similar facts and circumstances. He has also relied upon order dated 9.11.2021 passed in MA No. 76 of 2021 in BP No. 107 of 2021.
Considering that the facts and circumstances are similar to those in the earlier matters, the objection to the impleadment of respondent no. 2 is accepted to be valid. Hence, petitioner is directed to delete respondent no. 2 in these petitions and file an amended memo of parties within three weeks.
Post the matter before the Court of Registrar on 29.3.2022 for passing necessary orders and directions to make the petitions ready for hearing.