Lok Housing & Construction Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax
High Court
09 Apr 2009 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Lok Housing & Construction Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax
Date of order
09 Apr 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Lok Housing & Construction Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: It will be open to the State Bank of India to place all material available with the Respondents so as to enable the Respondents to take a decision whether the said properties may be accepted as security in the event this Court passes an order to that effect.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 26 OF 2009
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 26 OF 2009
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 26 OF 2009
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 2803 OF 2008
WRIT PETITION NO. 2803 OF 2008
Lok Housing & Construction Ltd. ...Petitioner
Vs.
The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax,
Range 8(2) & Ors. ..Respondents
And
State Bank of India ..Applicant/
Interveners
Mr. F.B.Andhyarunina, Senior Counsel i/b. Ms. Asifa
Khan for the petitioner.
Mr. B.M.Chatterjee i/b. Mr. Suresh Kumar for the
respondents.
Mr. Gupta i/b. M.V.Kini &Co. for the
applicant/Interveners.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO AND
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO AND
J.H.BHATIA,JJ.
J.H.BHATIA,JJ.
DATE: 9th April, 2009.
DATE: 9th April, 2009.
P.C
P.C.
2
1. This is an application by the intervenors to be
added as a party to the petition. A party to be added
has to be the necessary party or at the highest a proper
party.
2. In the instant case, all that the intervenors are
contending is that the properties which the petitioners
are intending to secure, the applicants have a charge in
respect of the said properties. That would not make
them necessary or proper party to this petition. It
will be open to the State Bank of India to place all
material available with the Respondents so as to enable
the Respondents to take a decision whether the said
properties may be accepted as security in the event this
Court passes an order to that effect.
3. Considering the fact that the intervenor is
neither a necessary nor proper party, the Chamber
Summons is dismissed.
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(J.H.BHATIA, J.)
(J.H.BHATIA, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.