Sharanappa S/O Siddappa Koudi Vs Sharanagouda S/O Virupaxagouda Police Patil

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:14277 WP No. 100053 of 2023

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 100053 OF 2023 (LB-ELE)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHARANAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA KOUDI, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TENGUNTI, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN CODE-583 277.

¶8

… PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. A.B. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

SHARANAGOUDA S/O VIRUPAXAGOUDA POLICE PATIL, AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TENGUNTI, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN CODE-583 277.

¶12

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶13

BALAMMA W/O MAHADEVAPPA ADIN, AGE. 57 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TENGUNTI, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN CODE-583 277.

¶14

GANGAMMA W/O BASAVANTAPPA JAINAR, AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TENGUNTI, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN CODE-583 277.

¶15

GYANAVVA D/O SHYAMAVVA, AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TENGUNTI, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN CODE-583 277.

¶16

DURAGAVVA W/O BHARAMAPPA, AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC-D:14277 WP No. 100053 of 2023

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

R/O. TENGUNTI, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN CODE-583 277.

¶21

RENUKA W/O BHARAMAGOUDA METI, AGE. 32 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TENGUNTI, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN CODE-583 277.

¶22

HANAMAVVA W/O SANNAHANAMAPPA MADAR, AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TENGUNTI, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN CODE-583 277.

¶23

SRI. K.S. HULI, LECTURER IN GOVT. P.U. COLLEGE, TAVARAGERA, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN CODE-583 279 AND THE RETURNING OFFICER FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT ELECTION OF TENGUNTI VILLAGE, TQ. KUSHTAGI.

¶24

THE TAHASILDAR, KUSHTAGI, TQ. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN CODE-583 277.

¶25

… RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. ASHOK T. KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R9; NOTICE TO R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7 AND R8 ARE SERVED)

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06/12/2022, PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT KUSHTAGI, IN ELECTION PETITION NO.2/2021, VIDE ANNEXURE-D.

¶28

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:14277 WP No. 100053 of 2023

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)

¶33

This petition is filed assailing the order dated 06.12.2022 in Election Petition No.2/2021 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kusthagi.

¶34

In the election held on 27.12.2020, the counting took place on 30.12.2020. The petitioner before the Trial Court contends that he had secured more votes than the respondent before the Trial Court, 68 votes were shown to be invalid and some of them were validly cast in favour of the petitioner before the Trial Court is the contention. Since there is a difference of 13 votes between the returned candidate and the petitioner before the Trial Court and since it is urged that 68 votes which were valid have been rejected as invalid, the application is filed to count the votes in the presence of the Court Commissioner.

¶35

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 would urge that under Section 19(1)(d)(iii) of the Karnataka Gram

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC-D:14277 WP No. 100053 of 2023

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, the Court can set aside the election in case the valid votes have been rejected or if invalid votes have been accepted.

¶40

Learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court would submit that no case is made out of to allow the application for recounting and the votes have been properly accepted by the Returning Officer and properly rejected by the Returning Officer.

¶41

This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records.

¶42

Admittedly, the difference of votes between the returned candidate and the petitioner before the Trial Court is 13. The petitioner before the Trial Court has raised a contention that 68 votes have been wrongly rejected.

¶43

Considering the slender margin of votes between the returned candidate and the petitioner before the Trial Court, this Court is of the view that the Trial Court is

¶44

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:14277 WP No. 100053 of 2023

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

justified in appointing the Commissioner to recount the votes. This Court is of the view that recounting of votes shall take place before the Court in the presence of the Presiding Officer.

¶47

With these observations, the petition is disposed

¶48

of .

¶49

Needless to say that the petition of this nature has to be decided as early as possible.

¶50

Sd/(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

¶51

NAA CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 27

Sharanappa S/O Siddappa Koudi v. Sharanagouda S/O Virupaxagouda Police Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharanappa S/O Siddappa Koudi v. Sharanagouda S/O Virupaxagouda Police Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balagavi Zilla Watandar Mahar Sangh Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Sharada Vs Smt. Saroja Devi

Shri. Jeeva Beera Gouda S/O Beera Gouda Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Shantabai W/O Manohar @ Monappa Zende Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri. v L Somanathreddy S/O v. Venkatramanreddy Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Janekunte Bheemalingappa Vs Smt. B. Shankramma