RAJESHEKAR BASAVARAJ PATIL versus SUBASH KALLUR AND ORS.

RAJESHEKAR BASAVARAJ PATIL versus SUBASH KALLUR AND ORS.

The contract was legally and formally terminated only after the date of election. The returned candidate failed to prove unilateral termination before election; thus, he suffered disqualification under Section 9A and his election is void under Section 100.

Parties
Appellant: Rajshekhar Basa v Araj Patil; Respondent: Subash Kallur
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Decision in Election Petition No. 13 of 1999
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Disqualification for Government Contracts, Void Election, Unilateral Contract Termination
Election Law Disqualification for Government Contracts Void Election Unilateral Contract Termination

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

Parties

Rajshekhar Basa v Araj Patil

Appellant

Subash Kallur

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Decision in Election Petition No. 13 of 1999

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the returned candidate was disqualified under Section 9A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 due to a subsisting contract with the government on the date of election
  2. 2 Whether the contract had been legally terminated before the election date

Ratio Decidendi

The contract was legally and formally terminated only after the date of election. The returned candidate failed to prove unilateral termination before election; thus, he suffered disqualification under Section 9A and his election is void under Section 100.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the High Court set aside
  • Election of returned candidate declared void