Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

52. I may also passingly deal with the contention in relation to the proxies. Apart from the fact that there is no such challenge in the plaint, otherwise also I have found from the report of the election officer, Mr. justice M. S. Joshi that the proxies were received by him on the given dated and because of the suit having been filed and an interim order issued by this court, these were kept by him in safe custody with Mr. R. D. Verma, Deputy Registrar of this court after sealing the same. The fact therefore that forms of proxies may have been issued before the election officer came into the picture does not retain any significance because it is the proxies which had been received and which are to be used during the election which matter and these, as per report dated December 28, 1989, referred to above have been duly received by the election officer and complete particulars of the invalidated and/or rejected proxies are annexed as also the proxies which have been found valid and it is specifically recorded that these had been "sealed by me" that is, by Mr. M. S. Josh himself. Consequently, prima facie, no suspicion can be entertained in respect of their proper use at the time of election.