SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Pat) 407

MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
Ascend Telecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Ajay Kumar – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: M/s Rajesh Ranjan, Atul Shankar.
For the Respondent: Mr. Ajatshatru.

MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, J.:–The present writ petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 3.12.2018, passed by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat, Patna in P.L.A. Case No. 8/2018 whereby and whereunder the Respondent No. 2 has been directed to remove the mobile tower installed on the house of the Respondent No. 3.

2. The short issue raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that firstly, the petitioner was not made a party to the said P.L.A. Case No. 8/2018, instituted at the instance of the Respondent no. 1 and secondly, the dispute in question does not fall within the purview of Section 22A of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1987”).

3. Another aspect of the matter, as argued by the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner is that since the petitioner was not made a party before the learned Court of Permanent Lok Adalat, Patna, there was no occasion for conduct of any conciliation proceedings, in between the parties, as such, on this ground as well, the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Patna, dated 3.12.2018 is perverse and fit to be set aside. At this juncture, it would be relevant to refer to Section 22A of the Act, 1987

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top