Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Sikkim High Court

Chandra Shekhar Gautam And Anr vs State Of Sikkim And Anr on 21 October, 2020

Author: Bhaskar Raj Pradhan

Bench: Bhaskar Raj Pradhan

                                                                               Court No.3.
                                             HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
                                 Record of proceedings through Video Conferencing


                                            W. P. (C) No.22 of 2019


          CHANDRA SHEKHAR GAUTAM & ANR.                                    ... PETITIONERS

                                                 VERSUS

          STATE OF SIKKIM & ANR.                                         .... RESPONDENTS

          Date:21.10.2020

          CORAM

                                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN, J.

For Petitioners : Ms. Rachhitta Rai, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Vivek Kohli, Advocate General. No.1 Ms. Yeshi Wangmoo Rinchen, Government Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr. Simeon Subba, Advocate. No.2.

............

I.A. No.04 of 2020 This is an application for impleadment of Panchdeep Construction Limited filed by the petitioners. It is contended by Ms. Rachhitta Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners that at the time of the filing of the writ petition the petitioners were not aware as to who was the contractor. It was only when the respondent no. 1 filed its counter affidavit that they have come to learn that Panchdeep Construction Limited was the contractor. The learned counsel took this court through the prayers in the writ petition as well as the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no.1 and more specifically paragraph 8 thereof which reads:

BHASKAR Digitally signed by BHASKAR RAJ RAJ "It is humbly submitted that since the entire cost of PRADHAN Date: 2020.10.21 PRADHAN 16:05:01 +05'30' the project is borne by the contractor under PPP mode the allotment of shop room will be done by the contractor."
Court No.3.
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM Record of proceedings through Video Conferencing The learned counsel for the petitioners therefore, submits that Panchdeep Construction Limited is a necessary party. The learned Advocate General does not contest the impleadment sought for nor does Mr. Simeon Subba, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2. From the prayers in the writ petition and the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no.1, it is clear that Panchdeep Construction Limited is a necessary party. The application is therefore, allowed. I.A. No.04 of 2020 stands disposed of accordingly.
The necessary amendments consequent upon the impleadment shall be done within a period of one week from today.
Notice to the newly impleaded respondent shall be issued thereafter, subject to the requisites being filed by the petitioners.



                                                               BHASKAR Digitally signed
                                                                       by BHASKAR RAJ
                                                               RAJ     PRADHAN
                                                                       Date: 2020.10.21
                                                               PRADHAN 16:05:43 +05'30'
                                                                      Judge




      Index: yes/No
to/   Internet: yes/No