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

1994 Supreme(SC) 538

A.M.AHMADI, G.N.RAY
Mohd. Quaramuddin – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


ORDER

1. The short question which is required to be considered is whether the court below was right in taking the view that the suit filed by the deceased-government servant was barred by limitation, having been filed three years after the date of dismissal. The order of dismissal was passed on 24-7-1967. Feeling aggrieved the delinquent filed a review under Rule 21 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1963, (Rules) which review was dismissed on 6-12-1967. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the tribunal was wrong in taking the view that the period of limitation began to run from 24-7-1967 when the order of dismissal was passed because the delinquent was entitled to exhaust the departmental remedy and, therefore, at best the period could run against him from 6-12-1967. He further stated that since statutory notice under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code had to be given the period of limitation stood enlarged by further two months. If that period is added the suit filed on 5-2-1971 was clearly in time. We think there is considerable force in this line of reasoning.

2. In taking the view that the suit was barred by limitation the tribunal placed relian






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