RAJ KUMAR YADAV versus SAMIR KUMAR MAHASETH AND ORS

RAJ KUMAR YADAV versus SAMIR KUMAR MAHASETH AND ORS

The election petition presented after court hours but within court premises on the last day of limitation should be deemed within limitation, as statutory period cannot be curtailed by procedural rules. Presentation to Judge in open court is a formality; administrative or ministerial staff may receive the petition.

Parties
Appellant: Raj Kumar Yadav; Respondents: Samir Kumar Mahaseth and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Election Petition as Barred by Limitation
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Limitation for Presenting Election Petition, Procedure for Filing Election Petition

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 7 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raj Kumar Yadav

Appellant

Samir Kumar Mahaseth and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Election Petition as Barred by Limitation

  1. 1 Whether an election petition presented after court hours, but within the court premises and on the last day of limitation, is valid
  2. 2 Interpretation of 'day' for limitation under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
  3. 3 Whether High Court procedural rules can curtail statutory period of limitation

Ratio Decidendi

The election petition presented after court hours but within court premises on the last day of limitation should be deemed within limitation, as statutory period cannot be curtailed by procedural rules. Presentation to Judge in open court is a formality; administrative or ministerial staff may receive the petition.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment of Patna High Court dated 10.9.2003 set aside
  • Election petition deemed to have been filed within limitation