Mini v. Anitha
Case brief
What is this about?
In a revision petition challenging an election order, the Court rejected the argument that failing to examine two voters with double voting allegations constituted abandonment of the petition. The lower courts validly set aside the election due to double voting by other witnesses that altered the margin of victory.
What did the court decide?
The revision petition is dismissed as it lacks merit; the concurrent decision upholding the respondent's election stands.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2009 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1931
CRP.No. 609 of 2009() --------------------ELECTION APPEAL .7/2007 of DISTRICT COURT,TRIVANDRUM OP(ELECTION) 8/2005 of III ADDL. MUNSIFF COURT,TRIVANDRUM ....................
REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/COUNTER PETITIONER
------------------------------------------------MINI, AGED 28, D/O.VASANTHI, RESIDING AT AKSHAY BHAVAN, DAYA NAGAR, KUDAPPANAKUNNU PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.P.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER
-----------------------------------ANITHA, AGED 39, D/O.GOVINDAN, RESIDING AT THEVOORKONAM, HOUSE NO.659, DARSANA NAGAR, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV.SRI.RAM MOHAN (CAVEATOR)
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER ON I.A.NO.3332 OF 2009 IN CRP NO.609 OF 2009
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the non-examination of two voters alleging double voting amounts to abandonment or withdrawal of the election petition under Section 109 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.
Whether the double voting by three voters materially affected the result of the election causing the returned candidate to lose by a majority of two votes.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Mini
- respondent
Anitha
Coram
S.S. Satheesachandran
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court