Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.24 seconds)

Charan Lal Sahu vs Nandkishore Bhatt & Ors on 1 August, 1973

19. Learned counsel, in support of his contention that requirement of deposit of security amount is mandatory in Election Petition and non-compliance of the same would render the Election Petition void, relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Charan Lal Sahu Vs. Nandkishore Bhatta and others 4, judgment of High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in T.H.Abdul Azeez Vs. K.G.Balasubramanian5 and judgment of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Anajamma Vs. S.Pushpamma and another 6.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 55 - P J Reddy - Full Document

Anajamma vs S. Pushpamma And Another on 7 November, 2000

19. Learned counsel, in support of his contention that requirement of deposit of security amount is mandatory in Election Petition and non-compliance of the same would render the Election Petition void, relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Charan Lal Sahu Vs. Nandkishore Bhatta and others 4, judgment of High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in T.H.Abdul Azeez Vs. K.G.Balasubramanian5 and judgment of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Anajamma Vs. S.Pushpamma and another 6.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 24 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1   2 Next