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

1956 Supreme(All) 57

AGARWALA, M.L.CHATURVEDI
MONGEY – Appellant
Versus
BOARD OF REVENUE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Dadhish Chandra Asthana

AGARWALA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ, direction or order be issued quashing, the judgment of the Honble Board of revenue.

( 2 ) THE judgment, which is sought to be quashed, is dated 27-2-1954. The applicant comes to this court two years after the judgment was delivered. The writ petitions under Article 226 of the constitution should be filed as quickly, after the delivery of judgment of the inferior tribunal, as possible. In Ferris on Extraordinary Legal Remedies it is stated in para 176 :

thirty days has been held a reasonable time in the ordinary case, and in any cases more than a reasonable time, within which to apply to the inferior court for a stay of mandate, and to duly serve and file the application. One rule laid down as generally applicable is, that as the common-law remedy by certiorari is in the nature of that afforded by writ of error, it will not be issued, or if issued will be quashed or superseded, where, in the absence of special facts or circumstances excusing the, delay, the application is not made until after the time within which a writ of error must be prosecuted




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