REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Neena Vikram Verma Appellant

V/S

Balmukund Singh Gautam Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

MURARKA RADBEY SHYAM KAM KUMAR VS. ROOP SINGH RATHORE [REFERRED TO]
JABAR SINGH VS. GENDA LAL [REFERRED TO]
JYOTI BASU VS. DEBI GHOSAL [REFERRED TO]
AZHAR HUSAIN VS. RAJIV GANDHI [REFERRED TO]
MANOHAR JOSHI VS. NITIN BHAURAO PATIL [REFERRED TO]
K K MODI VS. K N MODI [REFERRED TO]
L R SHIVARAMAGOWDA VS. T M CHANDRASHEKAR [REFERRED TO]
H D REVANNA VS. G PUTTASWAMY GOWDA [REFERRED TO]
UMA BALLAV RATH VS. MAHESHWAR MOHANTY [REFERRED TO]
T PHUNZATHANG VS. HANGKHANLIAN [REFERRED TO]
SOPAN SUKHDEO SABLE VS. ASSISTANT CHARITY COMMISSIONER [REFERRED TO]
MANGANI LAL MANDAL VS. BISHNU DEO BHANDARI [REFERRED TO]
P A MOHAMMED RIYAS VS. M K RAGHAVAN [REFERRED TO]
PONNALA LAKSHMAIAH VS. KOMMURI PRATAP REDDY [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEAVE Granted.

(2.) THIS petition for Special Leave seeks to challenge the order dated 5.12.2012 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Bench at Indore) allowing the application filed by the first respondent under Order 6 Rule 16 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) being I.A No. 7248/2012 for striking off certain pleadings from the Recrimination Petition filed by the Appellant herein. Facts leading to this petition are this wise:-

(3.) THE respondent No. 1 filed Election Petition bearing No. 11 of 2009 before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh (Bench at Indore), challenging the election of the appellant on the ground of improper reception, refusal and rejection of votes under the provisions of Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 (R.P. Act, 1951 in short). This was principally on the basis that the counting of the postal ballot was done in violation of Rule 63 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, to the benefit of the appellant.

Click here to view full judgment.

NEENA VIKRAM VERMA Vs. BALMUKUND SINGH GAUTAM

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address