Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.35 seconds)
S.P.Rajendran vs M.Udayakumar cites

Jagan Nath vs Jaswant Singh And Others on 20 January, 1954

“40. (i) The success of a candidate who has won at an election should not be lightly interfered with. Any petition seeking such interference must strictly conform to the requirements of the law. Though the purity of the election process has to be safeguarded and the Court shall be vigilant to see that people do not get elected by flagrant breaches of law or by committing corrupt practices, the setting aside of an election involves serious consequences not only for the returned candidate and the http://www.judis.nic.in 38/42 EL.P.No.1 of 2016 constituency, but also for the public at large inasmuch as re-election involves an enormous load on the public funds and administration. [See: Jagan Nath Vs. Jaswant Singh, Gajanan Krishnaji Bapat Vs. Dattaji Raghobaji Meghe].
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 203 - M C Mahajan - Full Document

Gajanan Krishnaji Bapat & Anr vs Dattaji Raghobaji Meghe & Ors on 18 July, 1995

“40. (i) The success of a candidate who has won at an election should not be lightly interfered with. Any petition seeking such interference must strictly conform to the requirements of the law. Though the purity of the election process has to be safeguarded and the Court shall be vigilant to see that people do not get elected by flagrant breaches of law or by committing corrupt practices, the setting aside of an election involves serious consequences not only for the returned candidate and the http://www.judis.nic.in 38/42 EL.P.No.1 of 2016 constituency, but also for the public at large inasmuch as re-election involves an enormous load on the public funds and administration. [See: Jagan Nath Vs. Jaswant Singh, Gajanan Krishnaji Bapat Vs. Dattaji Raghobaji Meghe].
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 121 - M K Mukherjee - Full Document

Rahim Khan vs Khurshid Ahmed & Ors on 8 August, 1974

14. When the petitioner come out with the election petition to declare the election of the returned candidate as void, he has to establish that improper receipt of votes or violation of the rules in counting of postal ballots and subsequent recounting, have materially affected the election of the returned candidate. The election of the candidate cannot be declared as void unless there is a clear and strong evidence compelling the Court to accept the contention of the defeated candidate. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rahim Khan Vs. Khurshid Ahmed reported in (1974) 2 SCC 660 has held as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 101 - V R Iyer - Full Document
1   2 Next