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

2003 Supreme(AP) 910

C.Y.SOMAYAJULU
Gandeay Shravan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
D. Srinivasulu (died) per LRs. – Respondent


C. Y. SOMAYAJULU, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application to ondone the delay of 1297 days in representing the C. M. A.

( 2 ) THE learned Counsel for petitioner gave his affidavit in support of this application, explaining the reasons for the delay.

( 3 ) WHEN the petition came up for orders, 1 entertained a doubt as to the maintainability of the petition for condonation of delay of more than thirty days in view of amendment to Section 148 cpc, which reads as follows: "where any period is fixed or granted by the court for the doing of any act prescribed or allowed by this Code, the Court may, in its discretion from time to time enlarge such period not exceeding thirty days in total even though the period originally fixed or granted may have expired. "

( 4 ) SINCE the matter is of general importance, on my request Sri Challa sitaramayya, learned Senior Counsel, and sri V. L. N. G. K. Murthy, Advocate, readily accepted to act as amicus curiae to assist the Court in deciding the question.

( 5 ) THE contention of Sri Challa sitaramayya, learned Senior Counsel, is that section 148 CPC applies to cases where cpc itself prescribes the time like Order VI rule 18, Order VII Rule 11, Order VIII rule 9










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