REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

DANTU BHASKARARAO Appellant

V/S

C.V.K. RAO Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

SHANKAR NANASAHEB V. MARUTI SITARAMA [REFERRED TO]
KHUSHWAQT RAI V. KARAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
COOPE V. RIDOUT [REFERRED TO]
R. V. DEMERS [REFERRED TO]
EDWARDS V. ROBERT [REFERRED TO]
BARKER V. PALMER [REFERRED TO]
MAHARAJA OF PARLKIMADI V. BIJAY CHANDRA DAS [REFERRED TO]
BENGAL COAL CO. LTD. V. HOMCE WADIA AND CO. [REFERRED TO]
HILLAS AND CO. LTD. V. ARCOS LTD. [REFERRED TO]
LAPISH V. BRAITH WATE [REFERRED TO]
BHOLANATH V. KRISHNA CHANDRA [REFERRED TO]
DIP NARAIN SINGH V. NAGESHAR PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
JWALA PRASAD MISRA V. MAHADEO [REFERRED TO]
GIAN CHAND V. SRI RAM BANSAL [REFERRED TO]
KAMAKSHYA NARAIN V. I.T. COMMISSIONER B. AND O. [REFERRED TO]
JAGAN NATH VS. JASWANT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
GHATTURBHUJ VITHALDAS JASANI VS. MORESHWAR PARASHRAM [REFERRED TO]
N SATYANATHAN VS. K SUBRAMANYAN [REFERRED TO]
HARISH CHMDRA BAJPAI VS. TRILOKI SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. C TOBIT [REFERRED TO]
INAMATI MALLAPPA BASAPPA VS. DESAI BASAVARAJ AYYAPPA [REFERRED TO]
BALWAN SINGH VS. LAKSHMI NARAIN [REFERRED TO]
RAM PADARATH MAHTO VS. MISHRI SINHA [REFERRED TO]
JAGAT DHISH BHARGAVA VS. JALWAHAR LAL BHARGAVA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH IN BOTH APPEALS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH IN BOTH APPEALS VS. LAKSHMI ICE FACTORY LUCKNOW:PRAKASH ICE FACTORY LUCKNOW [REFERRED TO]
JETHALAL C THAKKAR VS. R N KAPUR [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The interpretation of Section 7 (d) of the Representation of the People Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is involved in this appeal directed against the judgment of the Election Tribunal, Eluru.

(2.) The facts that are necessary for this enquiry are few and are not in dispute. The appellant and the respondent along with two others contested the general elections held in 1962 from Kakinada constituency of Andhra Pradesh. At the time of scrutiny of the nominations, an objection was raised by one of the contestants that the appellant was disqualified under Section 7 (d) of the Act by reason of his holding a mining licence and also a prospecting licence from the Govenment of Andbra Pradesh. This objection did not find favour with the Returning Officer with the result that the nomination paper was accepted.

(3.) The poll took place in February and ultimately the appellant was elected to the Legislative Assembly of Andhra Pradesh. Shortly thereafter, one of the defeated candidates, C.V.K. Rao, the respondent herein filed an election petition before the Election Commission, New Delhi, on 7th April calling in question the election of the appellant on the ground that he was subject to the disqualifications mentioned in Section 7 (d) of the Act by virtue of his holding a mining lease for period of 25 years commencing from 13-4-1960 from the Government of Andhra Pradesh and a prospecting licence for manganese ore in Guttigonda Forest. That petition also contained allegations of corrupt practices falling within the terms of Section 123 of the Act. It was accompanied by an affidavit in support of the allegations of corrupt practices as required by the relevant statutory provisions. The petition was forwarded to the Election Tribunal, Eluru in due course of time.

Click here to view full judgment.

DANTU BHASKARARAO Vs. C V K RAO

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address