https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273042 A High Court rule framed under constitutional rule-making power and prescribing a distinct limitation period for writ appeals was treated as a special law under Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963. Because Rule 2 did not expressly exclude Section 5, the provision for condonation of delay remained available, and the rule was not regarded as a complete code excluding Sections 4 to 24. On the facts, delay in filing the writ appeal was explained by transfer and misplacement of the case file, the explanation covered the full period, and sufficient cause was established. The delay was therefore condoned. en-us Wed, 19 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Jun 2018 16:41:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273042 A High Court rule framed under constitutional rule-making power and prescribing a distinct limitation period for writ appeals was treated as a special law under Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963. Because Rule 2 did not expressly exclude Section 5, the provision for condonation of delay remained available, and the rule was not regarded as a complete code excluding Sections 4 to 24. On the facts, delay in filing the writ appeal was explained by transfer and misplacement of the case file, the explanation covered the full period, and sufficient cause was established. The delay was therefore condoned. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 19 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273042