ERA SEZHIYAN versus T.R. BALU AND ORS.

ERA SEZHIYAN versus T.R. BALU AND ORS.

A ballot paper marked with green ink instead of the ball-point pen supplied with blue ink was rightly rejected for non-compliance with mandatory rules; ballot papers in which the figure '1' was marked opposite the candidate's name (even if not in designated column) were valid under Rule 37A, provided the intention was clear and no other express invalidity was present.

Parties
Appellant: Era Sezhiyam; Respondent: T.R. Balu; Respondent: Respondents 2-7; Respondent: Respondent 8 (Returning Officer)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 March 1990
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Madras High Court (election Petition No. 1 of 1986)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Ballot Validity, Preferential Voting, Rajya Sabha Elections

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Era Sezhiyam

Appellant

T.R. Balu

Respondent

Respondents 2-7

Respondent

Respondent 8 (Returning Officer)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Madras High Court (election Petition No. 1 of 1986)

  1. 1 Whether a ballot paper marked with green ink instead of blue ink was rightly rejected
  2. 2 Whether ballot papers in which the figure '1' was not marked in the space intended for marking preference were rightly accepted

Ratio Decidendi

A ballot paper marked with green ink instead of the ball-point pen supplied with blue ink was rightly rejected for non-compliance with mandatory rules; ballot papers in which the figure '1' was marked opposite the candidate's name (even if not in designated column) were valid under Rule 37A, provided the intention was clear and no other express invalidity was present.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs