Posts

Showing posts with the label Limitation Act

Must Read

Gulshan Prakash v. State of Haryana (2010) 1 SCC477

By
Image
Gulshan Prakash v. State of Haryana (2010) 1 SCC 477||Case Summary  Introduction  In this appeal, the Court has interpreted Article 15(4) of the Fundamental Right. It has been added by the 1st Amendment Act, of 1951. Facts The State of Haryana instructed Maharshi Dayanand University (MDU), Rohtak to conduct entrance examination for MD/MS/PG courses for the Session 2008-2009. The appellant made a representation to the Health Secretary for providing reservation for SC and ST in the Post Graduate courses, Since there was no response from the Health Secretary the Appellant filed a petition in the High Court.  The High Court dismissed the petition of the appellant therefore the appellant approached the Supreme Court by Special Leave Petition under Article 136. Appellant Contentions  MDU, Rohtak has provided 20% reservation for the graduate level courses or undergraduate courses therefore the said University should also provide reservation in for the PG courses.  The Government o
Post a Comment
Read more

Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Katiji, 137 AIR 1987

By
Collector, Land Acquisition v. Katiji Case Summary 1987 Introduction   This  landmark judgement have explained the scope of Section 5, Limitation act ,1963 and inclusion of Government as a party to claim Condonation of delay. Facts   State of J&k appealed against the order of the HC by which the compensation, which had to be made for acquisition of land for public purpose, was enhanced.  However this appeal was rejected by the court due to delay of 4 days. Hence, State of J&K went to the Supreme Court by Special Leave Petition under Article 136. Issue Involved On what ground, the court can condone the delay of an appeal ? Whether the law differs to 'Condone the delay' in case of State and Private Party ?  Ratio Decidendi Issue 1 The legislature has provided the power to condone the delay by enacting Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 . Section 5 of the limitation act says :  Any appeal or an application Other than an application made under Order XXI of the CPC, 1908
Post a Comment
Read more

R.B. Policies At Lloyd’s v. Butler (1949)

By
Image
 R.B. Policies At Lloyd’s v. Butler (1949)  Introduction This suit instituted by the plantiff "R.B Policies", who lost his motor car in June ,1940, against the defendant, in July 1947. Since the suit was instituted after the prescribed time period of 6 years by the Limitation Act, 1939, the Court declared it to be time barred. Facts The action brought by the plantiff against the defendant 'Mr. Alfred Butler' by a writ on July 1947, to claim the return of the motor car which was stolen from the plantiff on June, 1940 . In Jan 1947, the plantiff found car in the possession of the defendant with different registration no. which has been passed through a line of different purchasers during the previous seven years. Therefore, the plantiff filed suit on ground of wrongful detention of car by the defendant.  Defendant pleaded Plantiff cause of action is barred by the Limitation Act, 1939,  Section 2(1) of which says : No action shall be brought after the expirat
Post a Comment
Read more