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

1957 Supreme(Raj) 281

WANCHOO, MODI
Heer Singh – Appellant
Versus
Veerka – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.P. Surana, for Appellants

Modi J.—This is an appeal in an election matter. The appellants were admittedly not a party to the proceedings before the election tribunal. They have, therefore, alongwith their memorandum of appeal, also submitted a petition praying for being allowed to institute this appeal. The question is whether we should grant the permission and entertain this appeal. This question is interesting and is also of importance.

2. We may state a few facts bearing on the point which arises for determination. Respondents Veerka (alias Veera Ram) and Mohabat Singh were declared elected to the legislative assembly of this State from the Sirohi constituency at the last general election. Veerka was an independent candidate belonging to a schedule caste for the reserved seat in this constituency, and Mohabat Singh was a candidate of the Congress party for the other seat, which was general. Tejaram was also a candidate for the reserved seat but he was unsuccessful. The latter filed an election petition to the Election Commission, challenging the election of Veerka and Mohabat Singh, which was in due course referred for adjudication to a single member Tribunal consisting of Mr. Raj Krishna Mathur, District















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