SIMHADRI SATYA NARAYANA RAO Vs. M BUDDA PRASAD
LAWS(SC)-1990-12-31
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ANDHRA PRADESH)
Decided on December 21,1990

Simhadri Satya Narayana Rao Appellant
VERSUS
M Budda Prasad Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

HUKUMDEV NARAIN YADAV VS. LALIT NARAIN MISHRA [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

LAXMIBAI VS. RETURNING OFFICER KOPARGAON NAGAR PALIKA KOPARGAON DIST AHMEDNAGAR [LAWS(BOM)-1998-7-99] [REFERRED TO]
AJIT SINGH VS. NUSRAT ALI KHAN [LAWS(P&H)-1997-8-77] [REFERRED TO]
LACHHMAN DASS ARORA VS. GANESHI LAL [LAWS(P&H)-1996-7-108] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD. HAROON VS. MOHD. YAHYA [LAWS(DLH)-2012-9-353] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM LAL BANSAL VS. CHANDER MOHAN [LAWS(P&H)-1998-12-84] [REFERRED TO]
SUKHBEER SINGH VS. AMARINDER SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2008-7-48] [REFERRED TO]
MANOHAR JOSHI VS. NITIN BHAURAO PATIL [LAWS(SC)-1995-12-13] [RELIED ON]
LACHHMAN DAS ARORA VS. GANESHI LAL [LAWS(SC)-1999-9-99] [REFERRED]
SERISH MAJI VS. NISHIT KUMAR DOLUI [LAWS(CAL)-1999-3-7] [REFERRED TO]
R STALIN VS. STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER STATE ELECTION COMMISSION VADAPALANI [LAWS(MAD)-1997-11-115] [REFERRED TO]
LALITHA VS. BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE [LAWS(KAR)-2011-2-51] [REFERRED TO]
MANGE RAM VS. DISTT. DEV. & PANCHAYAT OFFICER-CUM-R.O. [LAWS(P&H)-1996-4-123] [REFERRED TO]
S. POORNIMA VS. N. BALAKRISHNAN [LAWS(MAD)-2014-10-289] [REFERRED TO]
NAVJOT SINGH PETITIONER VS. HARSIMRAT KAUR BADAL [LAWS(P&H)-2015-5-406] [REFERRED TO]
LACHMAN DAS ARORA VS. GANESHI LAL [LAWS(P&H)-1997-7-256] [REFERRED]
RASAL SINGH VS. GOVIND SINGH [LAWS(MPH)-2019-5-110] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The question for our consideration in this appeal is whether an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter called the 'act') filed on the reopening of the High court after vacations, the period of forty-five days under Section 81 of the Act having run out during the vacations, was liable to be dismissed under Section 86 of the Act.
(2.)The elections to the A. P. Legislative Assembly were held on 22/11/1989. The appellant contested the assembly seat from Avinagoda constituency. He was declared elected on November 26, 1989. An electionpetition calling in question the appellant's election could be presented to the A. P. High court within 45 days from the date of declaration of the election-result of the appellant. It is not disputed that the said period of forty-five days expired on 10/01/1990. The election petition, challenging the election of the appellant was, however, filed in the High court by the respondents on 15/01/1990.
(3.)The High court of A. P. remained closed for Sankranthi vacation from Tuesday, January 2nd to Friday, 12/01/1990 (both days inclusive). January 13 and 14, 1990 were holidays being second Saturday and Sunday. It was under these circumstances that the election petition was filed on the reopening of the High court on 15/01/1990.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.