MAGRAJ PATODIA versus R. K. BIRLA AND ORS.

MAGRAJ PATODIA versus R. K. BIRLA AND ORS.

No reliable evidence proved expenditure in excess of the prescribed limit was incurred by respondent No. 1 or with his authority or that of his election agent; only expenditures incurred with candidate's consent or authority are relevant under s. 77, and burden of proof lies with petitioner, which was not discharged.

Parties
Appellant: Magraj; Respondent No. 1: R. K. Birla; Respondent No. 2: Radheshyam Morarka
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 September 1970
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Rajasthan High Court, Election Petition
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Election Expenses, Corrupt Practice, Burden of Proof, Appellate Costs

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Magraj

Appellant

R. K. Birla

Respondent No. 1

Radheshyam Morarka

Respondent No. 2

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Rajasthan High Court, Election Petition

  1. 1 Whether expenditure in excess of prescribed limit was incurred or authorised by respondent or his election agent in violation of s. 77 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
  2. 2 Whether such expenditure constitutes corrupt practice under s. 123(6)
  3. 3 Whether the Supreme Court should interfere with findings of fact of the trial court

Ratio Decidendi

No reliable evidence proved expenditure in excess of the prescribed limit was incurred by respondent No. 1 or with his authority or that of his election agent; only expenditures incurred with candidate's consent or authority are relevant under s. 77, and burden of proof lies with petitioner, which was not discharged.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Parties to bear their own costs