G. P. MATHUR
Bolin Chetia – Appellant
Versus
Jogadish Bhuyan – Respondent
Order
R.C. Lahoti, CJI—In an appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 merely on its being filed, should the respondent be necessarily and in routine put on notice, forgoing the application of judicial mind to the merits of appeal, at that stage? Does this Court not have power to summarily throw out an appeal howsoever worthless it may be? These are the questions which have arisen for decision; thanks to the submission made with vehemence by the learned counsel for appellant.
2. The appellant was a candidate at the legislative assembly elections in the State of Assam. He lost in the election, as also in the High Court where an election petition filed by him putting in issue the election of the returned candidate has been directed to be dismissed on trial. He has filed the present appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter ‘the Act’, for short).
3. When the appeal was placed before the Court, we felt inclined to hear the learned counsel for the appellant on the question of admission, that is, whether the appeal deserved to be admitted for bi-parte hearing. The learned counsel for the appellant resisted the move of
Mahadev Tukaram Vetale & Ors. v. Smt. Sugandha & Anr.
M/s. Golcha Investment (P) Ltd. v. Shanti Chandra Bafna
Kiranmal Zumerlal Borana Marwadi v. Dnyanoba Bajirao Khot and others
Sita Ram and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Union of India and Another v. Raghubir Singh (Dead) by LRs. etc.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.