The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous because the petitioner represented that the cause of action no longer survived. Subsequent miscellaneous applications were also dismissed as a sequel.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.3051 of 2010
ORDER:
It is represented by Sri P.Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner that the cause in the writ petition does not survive.
Recording the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications in this Writ Petition shall stand dismissed.
________________________________ M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, J
20th June 2013
scs
Petitioner
Respondent
M.S. Ramachandra Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
