RAJANKUMAR SHANKARRAO TAWARE AND ANR. versus AJIT ANANTRAO PAWAR

RAJANKUMAR SHANKARRAO TAWARE AND ANR. versus AJIT ANANTRAO PAWAR

Appellants failed to establish a prima facie case for inspection of ballot papers; shifting of ballot boxes was for safe custody owing to rain, properly notified; absence of Presiding Officer's signature on ballot papers was not proved to materially affect the outcome, given respondent's margin of victory; High Court made no grave or palpable error in appreciating evidence.

Parties
Appellant: Rajankumar Shankarrao Taware; Respondent: Ajit Anantrao Pawar
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Inspection of Ballot Papers, Representation of People Act Section 100(1)(d)(iii), Election Malpractices, Prima Facie Case for Recount
Election Law Inspection of Ballot Papers Representation of People Act Section 100(1)(d)(iii) Election Malpractices Prima Facie Case for Recount

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

Parties

Rajankumar Shankarrao Taware

Appellant

Ajit Anantrao Pawar

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether shifting of ballot boxes without notice to candidates amounted to malpractice
  2. 2 Whether inspection of ballot papers is warranted based on allegations
  3. 3 Whether absence of Presiding Officer's signature on ballot papers materially affected election result

Ratio Decidendi

Appellants failed to establish a prima facie case for inspection of ballot papers; shifting of ballot boxes was for safe custody owing to rain, properly notified; absence of Presiding Officer's signature on ballot papers was not proved to materially affect the outcome, given respondent's margin of victory; High Court made no grave or palpable error in appreciating evidence.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Registry to take follow up action in terms of Section 116C(2) of the Representation of People Act, 1951
  • Costs on the parties