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

2001 Supreme(Jhk) 260

D.N.PRASAD
PRATIMA GOEL – Appellant
Versus
YASWANT SINHA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARVIND LAL, H.K.LAL, K.K.SAHAY

Judgment :

D. N. PRASAD, J.

( 1 ) AN application under Order VII Rule 11, C. P. C. read with Sections 81 and 86 of the Representation of People act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act)has been filed on behalf of the respondent praying therein to reject the election petition on the ground that it does not disclose any cause of action and the election petitioner lacks locus stand/ to file such petition under Section 81 of the Act.

( 2 ) IT is stated that the petitioner has neither been duly nominated nor even claims to have been duly nominated as a candidate at any election. There is only a bald allegation in the election petition that the election petitioner was a candidate. The power under Article 324 of the Constitution is plenary and the Election commision is competent to issue such orders as are considered by it to be expedient for the superintendence, directions and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections of Parliament, and the election Commision has issued a direction on 6/1/1998 (Annexure-A) which requires the filing of an affidavit and non-filing of the said affidavit by the election petitioner itself disqualifies for be















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