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

2000 Supreme(Ori) 34

C.R.PAL
TRINATH BEHERA – Appellant
Versus
RAMA CHANDRA SETHY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BIBHUDHENDRA MISHRA, DIPALI MOHAPATRA, I.C.DAS, KARUNAKAR JENA, R.MOHAPATRA, S.K.PADHI, S.PARIDA

C. R. PAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS Misc. Case arises out of Election Petition No. 9 of 1995 at the instance of respondent No. 1 praying to take up the Issue No. 9 as a preliminary issue.

( 2 ) THE petitioner has filed the election petition challenging the election of the respondent No. 1 to the Orissa Legislative Assembly from 74 (S. C.) Gopalpur Constituency in the election held on 9-3-1995 on the grounds that the respondent No. 1 adopted corrupt practices during that election as enumerated in the election petition. The respondent No. 1 on receiving the notice along with copy of election petition filed his written statement contending, inter alia, that the election petition as laid is not maintainable both on facts and in law; there has been no compliance of the requirements of Sections 81, 82 and 117 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 the election petition is defective the same having not been properly attested; the petition is not in proper form and that the affidavit in support of allegation of corrupt practices are not in order inasmuch as no specific date, time and name of person and source of information/knowledge have been indicated therein.

( 3 ) ON the pleadings of the






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