Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: parwanda in Baldev Singh Sole Proprietor Of Madaan ... vs Indian Plastics Footwear And Clothing ... on 22 October, 2021Matching Fragments
12. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 also submitted, relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mohd. Yunus v. Mohd. Mustaqim, (1983) 4 SCC 566 that since there was no perversity in the impugned order, the powers under Article 227 could not be exercised in the present matter. Relying on the judgement of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Gunjan Kumar v. Vipin Parwanda, 2015 SCC OnLine Del 9521, it was submitted that there was no common facts or questions of law and the transaction was not the same and as such the defenses would also be different, and in the light of these circumstances, respondent No.3 could not be impleaded as a party to the instant suit.