Maddipadu v. Meddipadu
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a Writ, Order on direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus Delaring the action of the Respondents in not initiating any step for fixing the liability under one-time settlement scheme in cooperative credit structure as per G.O.Ms.No.70 Agriculture & cooperation (coop.VI) Department, dated 22.2.2002 of the 1st Respondent as illegal, arbitrary and consequentially to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.ANANDA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.V.S.SURESH KUMAR The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P.No.8063 of 2002
ORAL ORDER:
Mr.Srihari, representing the learned counsel for petitioner states that the matter is settled outside the Court, therefore nothing survives in the writ petition for further adjudication. Recording the same, the writ petition is closed. NO order as to costs. Date: 10.6.2009 DA _____________ C.V.RAMULU, J THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P.No.8063 of 2002
10.6.2009
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 10 Jun 2009. The bench was C V RAMULU.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.