MANOHAR JOSHI versus BHAURAO RAGOJI PATIL THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

MANOHAR JOSHI versus BHAURAO RAGOJI PATIL THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

The High Court was correct in holding that deposit of security for costs is not required at the time of presenting substitution applications under Section 112(3); entitlement to substitution is subject to compliance, if any, with conditions as to security, which the Court must specify in its order.

Parties
Appellant: Manohar Joshi; Respondents: Bhaurao Ragoji Patil through Legal Representatives
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 January 1992
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Bombay High Court Order in Miscellaneous Applications in Election Petition No. 24 of 1990
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Substitution in Election Petition, Security for Costs, Procedure Under Representation of the People Act
Election Law Substitution in Election Petition Security for Costs Procedure Under Representation of the People Act

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manohar Joshi

Appellant

Bhaurao Ragoji Patil through Legal Representatives

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Bombay High Court Order in Miscellaneous Applications in Election Petition No. 24 of 1990

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether simultaneous deposit of security for costs is required at presentation of substitution applications under Section 112(3)
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in permitting substitution before security deposit

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court was correct in holding that deposit of security for costs is not required at the time of presenting substitution applications under Section 112(3); entitlement to substitution is subject to compliance, if any, with conditions as to security, which the Court must specify in its order.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed
  • Parties to bear their own costs