Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

AMAR SINGH versus SADHU SINGH & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Amar Singh v. Sadhu Singh & Ors - FAO-3210-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 1620 (10 March 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

F.A.O. NO. 3210 of 2005 (O&M)

DATE OF DECISION: March 10, 2006.

Parties Name

Amar Singh

...APPELLANT

VERSUS

Sadhu Singh and others

...RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
PRESENT: Mr. J. S. Bhandohal,

Advocate, for the appellant.

JUDGMENT:

CM No. 13864-C II of 2005

This application has been filed under Section 151 CPC for condonation of delay in refiling the appeal. Application is accompanied by an affidavit. In view of reasoning given in the application, it is allowed and delay in refiling the appeal is condoned.

CM No. 13863-C II of 2005

This application has been filed under Section 149 read with Section 151 CPC for making up deficiency in Court fee. Application is accompanied by an affidavit. In view of reasoning given in the application, it is allowed and delay in making good deficiency in Court fee stands condoned.

FAO No. 3210 of 2005

The appellant is a defeated candidate in election to the post of Sarpanch of village Ajner. He filed an election petition stating that actually number of votes polled was 765, whereas at the time of counting, only 760 votes were available. After recording evidence, his election petition was dismissed. The Tribunal below, by referring to the statement made by the appellant himself and also by the officials, observed that the votes polled were only 760 and the appellant has made the allegation even without looking into requisite records. Except making his own bald statement, appellant has not brought on record any evidence, in the shape of applications made to any higher authority, immediately after election that his votes were wrongly rejected. No case is made out for interference. Dismissed.

March 10, 2006. ( Jasbir Singh )

DKC Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.