BANAMALI DAS versus RAJENDRA CHANDRA MARDARAJ HARICHANDAN & ORS.

BANAMALI DAS versus RAJENDRA CHANDRA MARDARAJ HARICHANDAN & ORS.

As the entries in Form No. 20 were erroneous and did not reflect the results recorded in the Check Memo for the second round of counting on Table No. 13, and since respondent No. 1 actually secured the highest number of valid votes, respondent No. 1 is entitled to be declared the successful candidate. The certified copy of the Check Memo is admissible in evidence as a public document under the Evidence Act.

Parties
Appellant: Banamali Das; Respondent: Rajendra Chandra Mardaraj Harichandan; Respondent: Respondents Nos. 2-5; Respondent: Returning Officer (Respondent 6)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 August 1975
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment After Appeal From Orissa High Court's Order in E.p. No. 3 of 1974
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Recount of Votes, Admissibility of Certified Copies, Proof of Public Documents, Conduct of Election Rules
Election Law Recount of Votes Admissibility of Certified Copies Proof of Public Documents Conduct of Election Rules

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Banamali Das

Appellant

Rajendra Chandra Mardaraj Harichandan

Respondent

Respondents Nos. 2-5

Respondent

Returning Officer (Respondent 6)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment After Appeal From Orissa High Court's Order in E.p. No. 3 of 1974

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the entry of results in Form No. 20 for the second round of counting on Table No. 13 was erroneous, affecting the declaration of the successful candidate
  2. 2 Whether a certified copy of the Check Memo is admissible in evidence as proof of the original under the Evidence Act

Ratio Decidendi

As the entries in Form No. 20 were erroneous and did not reflect the results recorded in the Check Memo for the second round of counting on Table No. 13, and since respondent No. 1 actually secured the highest number of valid votes, respondent No. 1 is entitled to be declared the successful candidate. The certified copy of the Check Memo is admissible in evidence as a public document under the Evidence Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment and order of the Orissa High Court setting aside the appellant’s election and declaring respondent No. 1 as the successful candidate is upheld.
  • Costs awarded in favour of respondent No. 1.