Back
Supreme Court Of India
R.C. LAHOTI, CJI., G.P. MATHUR, J.
SUBODH KUMAR GUPTA AND OTHERS - Appellants
Versus
ALPANA GUPTA AND OTHERS - Respondents
Civil Appeals Nos. 1695-96 of 2005, decided on March 11, 2005
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The parties in the suit are related with each other. One Subodh Kumar Gupta is already a party to the suit. The plaintiffs (respondents herein) at one stage moved an application proposing to bring on record as defendants his wife, three daughters and the HUF of Subodh Kumar Gupta. At a later stage the application was not pressed and hence was dismissed. Subsequently, Subodh Kumar Gupta himself moved an application for impleadment of his wife, daughters and the HUF as defendants. This prayer was allowed by the trial court. In a petition preferred by the plaintiffs under Article 227 of the Constitution, the High Court interfered with the order of the trial court and set aside the order of impleadment.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the order passed by the High Court cannot be sustained. The trial court had exercised its discretion and assigned reasons for permitting impleadment. In exercise of limited jurisdiction conferred by Article 227, the High Court should not have interfered with the discretion exercised by the trial court. Even otherwise, having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the impleadment of wife, daughters and HUF of Subodh Kumar Gupta is justified on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.
4. The appeals are allowed. The impugned order of the High Court is set aside. Instead the order dated 2-1-2001 passed by the trial court i.e. the District Judge, Rajnandgaon is restored. It is made clear that such impleadment is without prejudice to the pleas open to the plaintiff-respondents and in the event of any written statement being filed by the newly added defendants, the plaintiffs would be at liberty to raise all such 9 pleas as may be available for them to be raised either on facts or on law in response to the pleas raised by the newly added parties in their written statement.
5. No order as to the costs.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
