Gurlal Singh Vs Deputy Commissioner etc.

At the time of notice of motion, learned counsel for the appellant had contended that recount of votes has been ordered without taking into consideration evidence available on record. Therefore, the impugned order is illegal and is liabe to be set aside.

¶14

Pursuant to notice of motion, Mr.K.S.Chahal,Advocate, has appeared on behalf of respondent No.2.(only contesting respondent) and has submitted that he has no objection if the impugned order is set aside and the Election Tribunal is directed to take into consideration evidence led on the issue of recount of votes and then decide the election petition afresh.

¶15

This satisfies the learned counsel for the appellant.

¶16

Hence, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set

¶17

2

¶18

FAO No.1911 of 2010 (O&M)

¶19

aside. The matter is remanded to Election Tribunal with a direction to take into account both oral as well as documentary evidence available on record led in relation to issue of recount of votes and adjudicate the lis afresh.

¶20

The parties are directed to appear before the Election Tribunal on 03.5.2010 . The Tribunal is further directed to decide the election petition as early as possible, preferably within a period of one month from the date of appearance of the parties before him.

¶21

April 23,2010 RR

¶22

(Rakesh Kumar Jain) Judge

Gurlal Singh v. Deputy Commissioner etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurlal Singh v. Deputy Commissioner etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs Suman Sharma

Neelam Rani & Anr. Vs Ashok Kumar & Anr.

Surasti and Ors. Vs Sajjan Singh & Ors.

Babli Devi and Ors. Vs Sanjeev Kumar Andors.

Suman Chopra Vs General Public

Amar Dutta Vs Naresh and Others