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

2002 Supreme(Kar) 459

M.F.SALDANHA, N.K.PATIL
Laxman Govindappa Kuri since dead by L. Rs. – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Jagadish D. Hiremath
Mr. Srinivas Gowda, Government Advocate

JUDGMENT

M.F. Saldanha, J.--We have heard the Appellant's learned Advocate as also the learned Government Advocate on merits. This appeal arises out of the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 27.8.1999 dismissing the Writ Petition No. 24958 of 1992. The Appellant's learned Advocate has submitted that on 1.8.1999 the Petitioner before the Court passed away and that this fact was not known to the Petitioner's learned Advocate as a result of which when the writ petition was taken up for hearing, the Court has heard the case and passed an order effectively against a dead person. Learned Advocate submitted that there is a well known maxim that a Court cannot pass an order against a dead person and that on this ground alone the order of the learned Single Judge will have to be set aside. What we are taking cognizance of is that the maxim in question cannot be applied in abstract or in a vacuum. The Courts have carved out that principle because on a death occurring new parties come into the picture, sometimes rights are created and rights are extinguished and taking into account all of this the practice that is prevalent and which has obtained legal sanction is that the legal repre






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