A writ petition dismissed as infructuous by a High Court does not lay down any new law, reaffirm existing precedent, or serve as binding or persuasive authority; such disposal does not affect substantive legal rights of the parties or set precedent for future cases.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WP/7129/2019 of Dariboina Venkata Lakshumma @ Venkata Lakshmi, Vs THE STATE OF AP |
| CNR | APHC010148392019 |
| Date of Registration | 10-06-2019 |
| Decision Date | 27-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS |
| Judgment Author | B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI |
| Court | High Court of Andhra Pradesh |
| Precedent Value | None (Does not set precedent) |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | None |
| Persuasive For | None |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- A writ petition dismissed as infructuous does not decide any legal question or alter rights of parties.
- Such an order does not constitute precedent and cannot be cited as binding or persuasive authority in future cases.
- Lawyers should note that ‘dismissed as infructuous’ reflects only a procedural closure, not an adjudication on merits.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court did not enter into any examination of facts or law.
- The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous, and no costs were imposed.
- No question of law was decided; no reasoning or legal analysis was provided in the order.
Factual Background
The specific facts underlying the writ petition are not set out in the order. The petition was dismissed as infructuous by the High Court, with no adjudication on merits.
Statutory Analysis
No statutory provisions were discussed or interpreted in the judgment, as the petition was dismissed solely on the ground of being infructuous.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – No new law laid down, no precedent set, no prior precedent overruled.