REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

PRASANNA KUMAR Appellant

V/S

G.M.SIDDESHWAR Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

DHARTIPAKAR MADAN LAL AGARWAL V. RAJIV GANDHI REPORTED [REFERRED TO]
PATEL DIPAKBHAI CHIMANBHAI V. CHAVDA ISHWARBHAI KOHDABHAI REPORTED [REFERRED TO]
SAMANT N BALKRISHNA VS. GEORGE FERNANDEZ [REFERRED TO]
SAMANT N BALKRISHNA VS. GEORGE FERNANDEZ [REFERRED TO]
HARDWARI LAL VS. KANWAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
JYOTI BASU VS. DEBI GHOSAL [REFERRED TO]
AZHAR HUSAIN VS. RAJIV GANDHI [REFERRED TO]
L R SHIVARAMAGOWDA VS. T M CHANDRASHEKAR [REFERRED TO]
T M JACOB VS. C POULOSE [REFERRED TO]
R P MOIDUTTY VS. P T KUNJU MOHAMMAD [REFERRED TO]
T PHUNZATHANG VS. HANGKHANLIAN [REFERRED TO]
B S YADIYURAPPA VS. MAHALINGAPPA [REFERRED TO]
BALDEV SINGH VS. SHINDER PAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
SATHI VIJAY KUMAR VS. TOTA SINGH [REFERRED TO]
SUDARSHA AVASTHI VS. SHIV PAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
ANIL VASUDEV SALGAONKAR VS. NARESH KUSHALI SHIGAONKAR [REFERRED TO]
RAM SUKH VS. DINESH AGGERWAL [REFERRED TO]
K K MOHAMAD KOYA VS. P M SAYEED [REFERRED TO]
G MALLIKARJUNAPPA VS. SHAMANUR SHIVASHANKARAPPA [REFERRED TO]
RAMU VS. SUNIL VALLAPURE [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the validity of the election of the first respondent to the 15th Lok Sabha from 13 Davanagere Lok Sabha Constituency at the election held on 30.04.2009 and the result of the election declared on 16.05.2009. The respondent No. 1 has filed Misc.Cvl. 386/2010 invoking Section 81(3), 83 and 86 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter called 'the said Act' r/w Order VII Rule 11 of the C.P.C. for the dismissal/rejection of the election petition and Misc.Cvl.1431/2010 invoking Order VI Rule 16 of the C.P.C. for striking out paragraph Nos. 1(III) (i) to (iv), II(2) to (17) of the election petition.

(2.) Sri M.B. Naragund, the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 complains of the non-compliance of the second part of Section 81(3) of the said Act which reads as follows:

(3.) According to the learned Counsel, every annexure referred to in the election petition and its supporting affidavit requires to be attested and certified by the concerned Notary. Notary has failed to put his signature and seal on every page of every annexure. None of the annexures are verified as required by law, so contends Sri Naragund.

Click here to view full judgment.

PRASANNA KUMAR Vs. G M SIDDESHWAR

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address