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

1974 Supreme(AP) 91

O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY, A.V.KRISHNA RAO
Revenue Divisional Officer, Vijayawada – Appellant
Versus
T. Laxminarayana – Respondent


CHINNAPA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE question for consideration in this batch of petitions is whether the Government and the Government Pleaders hold a position of any greater privilege than other litigants and their lawyers. We are forced to pose the question in this blunt fashion because day after day we are faced with applications made by the Government Pleaders on behalf of the Government to condone enormous delays in preferring appeals and in paying proper court-fee. Now, the Limitation Act makes no distinction between the Government and other parties who come to the High Court with appeals in civil cases. We may notice that in Criminal cases a slight distinction is made between appeals filed by the State from orders of acquittal for which the Limitation Act provides ninety days and appeals by convicted persons against judgments of conviction for which the Act provides sixty days only. We may also note with satisfaction that hardly ever an application is made by the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State to condone delay in filing an appeal against an order of acquittal. In civil cases Article 116 of the Limitation Act provides for the same period of ninety days whether the appeal i



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