Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.44 seconds)
Documents citing Madanapalle Municipality vs Syed Ahamad And Ors. on 30 October, 2002

M/S Vintage Inn vs Atchutha Sulochana on 14 November, 2019

In the alternative he also argues basing on Madanapalle Municipality v Syed Ahamad and Others2and N. Eshwara Prasad and Others v Margadarshi Chit Fund Limited, Warangal and another3 as the claim is hopelessly time barred and under Article 63 of the Limitation Act-1963 (in short "the Act") as it is made more than three years after the cause of actionarose the same should be dismissed. He submits that as the claim is barred by time, the amendment should not be allowed. He supports the impugned order that has beenpassed by the lower Court. On the issue of matter coming up for trial both the counsel agree 2 2003 (1) ALD 729 3 2004 (3) ALD 128 4 that the trial has not been commenced and that the lower court rightly recorded in para-4 of the impugned order that the matter is now coming for trial.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

N. Eshwara Prasad And Ors. vs Margadarshi Chit Fund Limited And Anr. on 6 November, 2003

13. The learned Counsel for the plaintiff sought to place reliance upon the judgment of this Court in Madanapalle Municipality v. Syed Ahamad, 2003 (1) ALD 729, wherein this Court reiterated the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the judgment referred supra by holding that the counter-claim could be made even after the filing of the written statement, provided the cause of action arose prior to the filing of the written statement or prior to the date fixed for filing of the writ petition, subject however, to the condition that it should be filed within the limitation prescribed.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 5 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1