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

1996 Supreme(AP) 1250

B.K.SOMASEKHARA, P.S.MISHRA, V.RAJAGOPALA REDDY
Honble Secretary and Correspondent, Badruka College of Commerce – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


( 1 ) THE order of dismissal of W. P. M. P. No. 287. 19/95 in W. P. M. P. (SR) No. 116983/95 in W. P. No. 8394 of 1989 dated 18-6-1996 passed by the learned single Judge questioned in this appeal having a tinge of dealing with such matters arising out of proceedings under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India applying the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Limitation Act confronts us with these questions to lay down the correct law settled so far in this regard. 1. Whether (a) the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short, the Code) and (b) the provisions of Limitation Act, 1963 (in short, the Act) are applicable to the proceedings under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India (in short, the Constitution)? 2. If not, what is the effect of Rules 20, 24 and 25 of the Writ Proceeding Rules of Andhra Pradesh, 1977 (in short, the Rules)?

( 2 ) THE Amendment Act of 1976 of the Code was brought into force with effect from 1-2-1977. Section 141 of the Code as it existed before the amendment Act of 1976 enabled any Court of Civil Jurisdiction to apply the procedure provided in the Code in regard to suits in all its proceedings. But the Amendment Act adding the













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