Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)
Sadashiv Mahadeo Yavaluje & Gajanan ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 6 December, 1989 cites

Ranjit Singh vs Pritam Singh & Ors on 8 February, 1966

6. We are supported in our views by the decision of this Court in Ranjit Singh v. Pritam Singh and Ors. it "When Section 33(5) refers to a copy of the relevant parts of the electoral roll, it means a part as defined in Rule 5. A complete copy would carry the various amendments made in the roll and enable the Returning Officer to see whether the name of the candidate continued in the roll for the whole of the relevant period."
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 15 - K N Wanchoo - Full Document

Jagannath Ramchandra Nunekar vs Genu Govind Kadam & Others on 14 September, 1988

8. Learned Counsel for the appellant placed a strong reliance on the decision of this Court in Jagannath Ramchandra Nunekar v. Gene Govind Kadam and Ors. That judgment is, however, clearly distinguishable on facts. In that case, clearly distinguishable on facts. In that case, a certified copy of the relevant entry in the electoral roll was furnished to the appellant on January 8, 1986 which was only one day before the date on which was only one day before the date on which he filed his nomination paper. The presumption would, therefore, arise that such a certified copy would be of the relevant entry in the final electoral roll and that presumption was justified on the actual facts. That decision has no application to this case where a certified copy of the relevant part of the electoral roll was applied for and obtained several months before the revision of the electoral roll.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 26 - E S Venkataramiah - Full Document
1