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

2000 Supreme(SC) 295

S.SAGHIR AHMAD, S.RAJENDRA BABU, B.N.KIRPAL
X – Appellant
Versus
Hospital Z – Respondent


(1) WRIT Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution against the judgment already passed by this court cannot be entertained. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that prayer (a) which seeks overruling or setting aside of the judgment already passed in Mr. X v. Hospital Z (1998) 8 SCC 296 may be deleted. This prayer shall accordingly be deleted. So also, the other prayers which indirectly concern the correctness of the judgment already passed shall stand deleted. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petition may not be treated as a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution but may be treated as an application for clarification/ directions in the case already decided by this Court, viz. Mr. X v. Hospital Z (C.A. No. 4641/1998).

(2) WE direct that the office shall not treat this as a writ petition filed under Article 32, but shall register it separately as an IA for clarification/directions in C.A. No. 4641/1998.

(3) NOTICE of this I.A. returnable within two weeks shall be issued to National Aids Control Organisation, Union of India and Indian Medical Association which is already represented in IA No. 2-3. Notice shall also go to Medical


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