Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KALYAN RAI SURANA
Nijam Uddin Choudhury, S/o. Late Ishub Ali Choudhury – Appellant
Versus
Moon Swarnakar, W/o. Ashok Verma And D/o. Late Bijoy Bahadur Swarnakar – Respondent
ORDER :
(KALYAN RAI SURANA, J.)
| Heading |
| Preliminaries |
| Prayer in connected election petition |
| Submission on behalf of applicant |
| Submission on behalf of respondent (election petitioner) |
| Discussion and decision |
| Sub heading: |
| Relevant provision of RP Act |
| On the scope and ambit of the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 CPC |
| Four points on which the election of the applicant has been challenged in the connected election petition |
| On allegations that the applicant has disclosed only one FIR and not the other three FIRs |
| On allegations of failure of the applicant and his wife to disclose immovable and movable properties |
| On the allegations of non-disclosure of investment make in land and/or immovable property |
| On non-disclosure of contractual details |
| On mismatch of name in the affidavit and name as spelt in applicant’s signature |
Heard Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned senior counsel for the applicant. Apart from hearing Mr. D. Saikia, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. P. Nayak, learned counsel for the respondent, also heard Mr. P. Nayak, learned counsel for the respondent.
Preliminaries:
2) The applicant in this interlocutory application is the returned candidate to the Assam Legislative Constituency from the No. 8 Algap
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
