V.CHITAMBARESH
Sauda Beevi – Appellant
Versus
Subaida Pareeth – Respondent
V. Chitambaresh, J.
1. Can the enquiry in a petition for recrimination commence when once the result of the declared candidate has been found to be materially affected or only after the declaration that his election is void in the election petition? Should not the appellate court being the final court of facts compare the signatures found in the relevant documents by itself in order to decipher as to whether there has been double voting or voting by impersonation? These issues crop up in an election petition filed under S. 89 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 ('the Act' for short) which stands allowed by the election court and confirmed in appeal. The following are the tally of votes secured by all the candidates who contested from Ward No. VI of Asamannoor Grama Panchayat in Ernakulam District in the election held under the provisions of the Act on 25.10.2010:
The Returning Officer found that an equality of votes of 324:324 exists and therefore decided to draw a lot between the election petitioner and the returned candidate as enjoined under S. 79 of the Act. The addition of one vote would have entitled any one of those candidates to be declared elected and the election p
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.