The High Court dismissed an Election Petition for default. Justice Ranganathan noted the petitioner's counsel absented themselves from 53 adjournments between 2007 and 2012, citing Supreme Court precedent to end the prolonged inactivity.
The Election Petition was dismissed for default due to the petitioner's non-appearance.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN ELECTION PETITION NO.2 OF 2007
ORDER:
A perusal of the docket proceedings shows that, from the year 2007 till 12.4.2012, the Election Petition has been adjourned on 53 occasions for non-appearance of the counsel for the petitioner. Today also neither is the counsel for the petitioner present nor is there any representation on his behalf.
In DR. P. Nalla Thampy Thera v. B.L. Shanker[1] , the Supreme Court held that an Election Petition was liable to be dismissed for default in situations covered by Order 9 or Order 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Order 9 C.P.C. relates to appearance of parties and consequence of non-appearance.
As the matter has suffered adjournments on 53 occasions over the past four year period, and as even today the counsel for the petitioner is not present, the Election Petition is dismissed for default following the judgment of the Supreme Court in DR. P. Nalla Thampy Thera1 .
19-4-
2012 asp
[1] 1984(Supp) SCC 631
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an Election Petition is liable to be dismissed for default due to persisten.t non-appearance of the petitioner's counsel.
Whether 53 successive adjournments for non-appearance justify dismissal of the Election Petition.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
DR. P. Nalla Thampy Thera v. B.L. ShankerFollowed¶4
1984(Supp) SCC 631 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Respondent
Ramesh Ranganathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
