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

1985 Supreme(Ori) 166

S.C.MOHAPATRA
BIJOYSHREE – Appellant
Versus
MADHUSUDAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.PASAYAT, ANANG PATNAIK, BIBHUDHENDRA MISHRA, K.K.JENA, L.PANGARI, N.C.PANIGRAHI

S. C. MOHAPATRA, J.


( 1 ) THE Respondent No. 1 (the returned candidate) while filing the list of witnesses to be summoned to be examined by him has filed this application to permit him to file the list of witnesses and the list of documents to be called for so far as they relate to the issues on his application for recrimination, if and when the same is taken up for hearing.

( 2 ) MR. B. Misra, the learned counsel for respondent No. 1 has submitted that the summoning those witnesses to be present for examination would be prejudicial to respondent No. 1 inasmuch as there may not be any occasion for the same if it is found that the election of respondent No. 1 is not void. Relying upon the majority view expressed in the decision reported in AIR 1964 SC 1200 (Jabar Singh v. Ganda Lal) Mr. Misra emphasised that the law envisages the trial of issues in respect of the grounds of Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 first and after the Court declares that the election of the returned candidate is void, the issues relating to declaring another candidate elected as provided under section 101 would arise and at that stage only the issues relating to recrimination under





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