In which of the following cases the Calcutta High Court held that "Though Limitation of 1 year as provided in Contempt of Courts Act, in fit case provisions of section 5 and 17 of Limitation Act can be applied by virtue of section 29(2)of Limitation Act"?

In which of the following cases the Calcutta High Court held that "Though Limitation of 1 year as provided in Contempt of Courts Act, in fit case provisions of section 5 and 17 of Limitation Act can be applied by virtue of section 29(2)of Limitation Act"? Correct Answer Subrata Kundu v. Kshiti Gostoami, AIR 2010 Cal 44

Related Questions

A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court passes judgment in a matter. In a later case before a high court, a party presents the Supreme Court judgment as a binding authority. The opposing party claims that the high court is not bound by the Supreme Court's judgment because relevant provisions of law were not brought to the notice of the Supreme Court in that case. Which of the following is most correct in this case?
Principle: Article 141 of the Constitution provides that the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the territory of India.