BRLJENDRALAL GUPTA AND ANOTHER versus JWALAPRASAD AND OTHERS.

BRLJENDRALAL GUPTA AND ANOTHER versus JWALAPRASAD AND OTHERS.

The failure of a candidate to specify his age in the nomination paper amounts to a defect of substantial character under s.36(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, justifying rejection of the nomination paper.

Parties
Appellants: Brijendralal Gupta and another; Respondents: Jwalaprasad and others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 April 1960
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order of Madhya Pradesh High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside; Tribunal decision restored.
Legal Topics
Nomination Paper Defects, Scrutiny of Nominations, Rejection of Nomination, Defect of Substantial Character Under S.36(4) Representation of the People Act, 1951
Election Law Nomination Paper Defects Scrutiny of Nominations Rejection of Nomination Defect of Substantial Character Under S.36(4) Representation of the People Act, 1951

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brijendralal Gupta and another

Appellants

Jwalaprasad and others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order of Madhya Pradesh High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether omission to mention age in nomination paper amounts to defect of substantial character under s.36(4) of Representation of the People Act, 1951
  2. 2 Whether rejection of nomination paper on this ground was proper

Ratio Decidendi

The failure of a candidate to specify his age in the nomination paper amounts to a defect of substantial character under s.36(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, justifying rejection of the nomination paper.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside; Tribunal decision restored.

Orders

  • High Court's decision set aside
  • Election Tribunal's decision restored