9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (2) TMI 410X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Soli J. Sorabjee, A.M. Khanwilkar, Ravinder Narain, S. Ganesh, D.N. Misra and S. Kachwaha, S.K. Dholakia and A.S. Bhasme for the Respondents. K.K. Venugopal, E.C. Agrawala, Ashwini Kumar, Ms. Purnima Sethi and A.V. Pilli for the Applicant. KANIA, J. This Special Leave Petition is directed against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 4497 of 1990. The Hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondents and have prayed for leave to file the Special Leave Petition on the ground that the judgment adversely affects them and they are aggrieved by the same. Permission is granted. Leave is granted. Counsel heard. We find that appellants can be said to be parties aggrieved by the impugned judgment, even if they are not regarded as necessary parties in the writ petition. In the facts and circum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nfined to the normal grounds on which a review can be sought but the entire controversy will be regarded as open as between the appellants herein and the respondents. The interim order made by this Court on January 8, 1991 will continue to remain in operation till the review petition is decided by the High Court. However, it will be open for the High Court to vary or vacate the interim order on a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
