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

1952 Supreme(Raj) 127

WANCHOO, BAPNA
Rajasthan State – Appellant
Versus
Nathmal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
L.N. Mutha, for State; Hastimal, for non-Petitioners

Wanchoo, C.J.—This is an application by the State of Rajasthan for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under Arts. 132 and 133 of the Constitution of India.

2. The application has been opposed on behalf of the opposite party on two technical grounds, namely—

(1) that it is barred by limitation, and (2) that it has not been properly presented.

Learned counsel for the opposite party agrees that but for these two technical matters, the case is a fit one for granting leave under Arts. 132 (1) and 133 (1) (c) of the Constitution.

3. The case arose on an application under Art. 226 of the Constitution by Nathmal and Mithalal. That application was allowed on the 19th October, 1951. The present application was filed on the 30th of January, 1952. It is contended on behalf of the opposite party that the application is barred by limitation for two reasons

(1) that the applicant is not entitled to any deduction of time taken in obtaining a copy of the judgment to be appealed from under sec. 12 of the Limitation Act, and

(2) that, in any case, Mithalal having been brought on the record on an application, dated 5th March, 1952, the application was burred against him.

4. Arts. 132 and 133 of the Constit









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