The High Court reaffirmed that dismissing a writ petition as “infructuous” does not decide any question of law or set binding precedent. The judgment does not alter or clarify substantive legal principles and has no effect as a precedent for future cases — practitioners should note its merely procedural nature.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WP/14239/2019 of M/s. 14. Reels LLP, Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH |
| CNR | APHC010307642019 |
| Date of Registration | 20-09-2019 |
| Decision Date | 02-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Dismissed as infructuous |
| Judgment Author | B V L N Chakravarthi |
| Court | High Court of Andhra Pradesh |
| Precedent Value | Not binding; no question of law decided |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | None — no substantive ruling given |
| Persuasive For | None |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The order simply dismisses the writ petition as infructuous and does not discuss or decide any questions of law or fact.
- There is no ratio decidendi or guidance provided for future cases.
- Lawyers should not rely on this judgment in support or opposition of substantive legal arguments.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court, by order of B V L N Chakravarthi, J., dismissed the writ petition as infructuous.
- No substantive legal issues, questions of law, or statutory provisions were discussed or resolved.
- The order is strictly procedural, signifying that the original cause of grievance no longer subsists or requires adjudication.
Alert Indicators
- Precedent Followed — No deviation from established law; the case is dismissed without deciding issues on merits.