SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1983 Supreme(Del) 227

AVADH BEHARI ROHATGI
GOPAL PARSAD SHASTRI – Appellant
Versus
ARCHANA KUMAR – Respondent


( 1 ) THIS is an election petition under Ss. 80 and 81, Representation of the People Act, 1951 (the Act) read with S. 9, Delhi Administration Act, 1960. The petitioner has challenged the election of respondent No, 1 to the Metropolitan Council from R. K. Ruram, Constituency, No. 12.

( 2 ) THESE are the facts. Election was held in the R. K. Purak, constituency on 5-2- 1983. The petitioner was a candidate. So was respondent No. 1. On 6-2-1983 counting took place. The result was declared on the same date. Respondent 1 was declared as a successful candidate.

( 3 ) NOW an election petition under Sections 80 and 81 has to be filed within 45 days from the date of election of the returned candidate. This period of 45 days expired on 23-3-1983. Before the expiry of 45 days, the present petition was filed on 24-2-1983. But what happened is this, that though the election petition was filed, the petitioner did not comply with the provisions of S. 81 (3) of the Act. He did not file copies of the election petition in accordance with the requirement of sub-section (3) of Section 81. In fact he did not file any copies with the election petition.

( 4 ) THE office of the High Court raised an objecti











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top