2009 (12) TMI 923

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l Application No.1200 of 2009 with the following prayers: "10.The applicants therefore pray that: A) That the Honourable Court will be pleased to allow this application; B) That this Honourable Court will be pleased to order to review and recall order dated 09.02.2009 passed by this Honourable Court in Special Civil Application No.22581 of 2006 and further be pleased to hear the said writ petition after directing the original petitioner to implied the the present applicants as party respondents. C) Pending admission hearing and final disposal of this application, this Honourable Court may be pleased to suspend the operation and implementation of the order at Annexure-A to the application; D) That this Honourable Court may be ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....." (3) Heard learned senior advocate appearing for the applicants. It was submitted that the applicants were successful bidders at the auction conducted by Income Tax Department and were thus necessary party in the main petition, which had been filed by the defaulter, whose property was put up for auction sale. Referring to the historical backdrop of litigation between the tax defaulter and Income Tax Department learned counsel submitted that the applicants had also sought impleadment in the civil suit filed by the tax defaulter as well as in earlier writ petition filed by the tax defaulter. Therefore, the petitioner of the main petition was aware about the interest of the applicants in the property in question and the applicants ough....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tax Department had already moved the Apex Court by Special Leave Petition, pendency thereof per se would not render the present applications infructuous and High Court is entitled to decide the same on merits. For this purpose attention was invited to Supreme Court judgment in case of Kapoor Chand & Ors., Vs. Ganesh Dutt & Ors., 1993 Supp (4) SCC 432. (4) Learned advocate appearing for the original petitioner as well as Income Tax Department have been heard. On behalf of the original petitioner it was submitted that sale had not been completed as no sale certificate had been issued and, therefore, the applicants cannot seek to be treated as affected parties, the dispute being primarily between the petitioner and the Income Tax Departmen....