https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37588 A writ petition under Article 226 is an exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction, so the procedural scheme of the Code of Civil Procedure does not apply in terms; the Explanation to Section 141 excludes Article 226 proceedings. As a result, the substitution timeline under Order XXII Rule 4 read with Article 120 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is not attracted to writ proceedings. The petition cannot be treated as abated merely because the application to bring legal representatives on record was filed beyond 90 days, though general substitution principles may still be applied where appropriate. en-us Thu, 27 Apr 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:53:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37588 A writ petition under Article 226 is an exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction, so the procedural scheme of the Code of Civil Procedure does not apply in terms; the Explanation to Section 141 excludes Article 226 proceedings. As a result, the substitution timeline under Order XXII Rule 4 read with Article 120 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is not attracted to writ proceedings. The petition cannot be treated as abated merely because the application to bring legal representatives on record was filed beyond 90 days, though general substitution principles may still be applied where appropriate. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 27 Apr 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37588