https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299270 An impleadment application filed after a writ matter had been reserved for judgment did not create any surviving right to participate in that concluded proceeding. The earlier writ judgment had not decided disputed questions of encroachment or title, but had only directed action in accordance with law, including notice and opportunity to persons in possession. As no adverse adjudication against the petitioner-Society could be shown, a non-party not prejudicially affected by the judgment could not maintain review. The exceptional rule allowing review at the instance of an affected third party was held inapplicable, and the review petition was rejected as not maintainable. en-us Wed, 20 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Dec 2021 17:53:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299270 An impleadment application filed after a writ matter had been reserved for judgment did not create any surviving right to participate in that concluded proceeding. The earlier writ judgment had not decided disputed questions of encroachment or title, but had only directed action in accordance with law, including notice and opportunity to persons in possession. As no adverse adjudication against the petitioner-Society could be shown, a non-party not prejudicially affected by the judgment could not maintain review. The exceptional rule allowing review at the instance of an affected third party was held inapplicable, and the review petition was rejected as not maintainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 20 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299270