GOPAL PARSHAD SHASTRI Vs. ARCHNA KUMAR
LAWS(DLH)-1983-8-16
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on August 08,1983

GOPAL PARSAD SHASTRI Appellant
VERSUS
ARCHANA KUMAR Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

ANITA BABBAR VS. SH. O.P. BABBAR [LAWS(DLH)-2011-6-84] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI GILBERT JOHN MENDONCA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2018-2-404] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH KHATRI LAMBERDAR VS. MS. KAVITA JAIN [LAWS(P&H)-2017-6-30] [REFERRED TO]
G DEVARAJEGOWDA VS. PRAJWAL REVANNA [LAWS(KAR)-2020-1-86] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This is an election petition under Ss. 80 and 81, Representation of the People Act, 1951 (the Act) read with S. 9, Delhi Administration Act, 1960. The petitioner has challenged the election of respondent No, 1 to the Metropolitan Council from R. K. Ruram, Constituency, No. 12.
(2.)These are the facts. Election was held in the R. K. Purak, constituency on 5-2- 1983. The petitioner was a candidate. So was respondent No. 1. On 6-2-1983 counting took place. The result was declared on the same date. Respondent 1 was declared as a successful candidate.
(3.)Now an election petition under Sections 80 and 81 has to be filed within 45 days from the date of election of the returned candidate. This period of 45 days expired on 23-3-1983. Before the expiry of 45 days, the present petition was filed on 24-2-1983. But what happened is this, that though the election petition was filed, the petitioner did not comply with the provisions of S. 81 (3) of the Act. He did not file copies of the election petition in accordance with the requirement of sub-section (3) of Section 81. In fact he did not file any copies with the election petition.
;


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