Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD
Raj Jaiswal S/o Late Deenanath Jaiswal – Appellant
Versus
Aatmanarayan Patel S/o Late Ramsay Patel – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.
1. The applicant has preferred the present revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, feeling aggrieved by the order dated 04.07.2025 passed by the First District Judge, Katghora, Distt. - Korba (C.G.), whereby the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. was dismissed.
2. Facts of the case, as canvased by the applicant, are that the present revision petition arises out of an election petition filed by respondent No.1, Atmanaryan Patel, challenging the election of the present applicant as the President of the Municipal Council. Respondent No.1 has filed the election petition under Section 20 of the Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act 1961”). The applicant was duly elected as the President of the Municipal Council, and this election has been challenged by respondent No.1 before the Additional District Judge, Katghora. However, the applicant submits that the Additional District Judge does not have jurisdiction to entertain the election petition as per the provisions of Section 20 of the Act 1961. Despite this jurisdictional bar, the concerned Court proceeded to
The mandatory requirement for security deposit in election petitions is essential and non-compliance leads to dismissal, emphasizing the procedural integrity governed by the Chhattisgarh Municipaliti....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
