SARDAR GURMEJ SINGH versus SARDAR PARTAP SINGH KAIRON

SARDAR GURMEJ SINGH versus SARDAR PARTAP SINGH KAIRON

Lambardars are not persons falling within clause (f) of section 123(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (they are excluded as village revenue officers) and accordingly the respondent did not commit a corrupt practice by appointing lambardars as his polling and counting agents.

Parties
Appellant: Sardar Gurmej Singh; Respondent: Sardar Partap Singh Kairon
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 September 1959
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment and Order of the Punjab High Court Dated 12 March 1959
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Corrupt Practice Under S.123(7)(f) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, Status of Lambardars, Distinction Between Revenue Officers and Village Accountants, Interpretation of Inclusive and Excluding Clauses

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sardar Gurmej Singh

Appellant

Sardar Partap Singh Kairon

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment and Order of the Punjab High Court Dated 12 March 1959

  1. 1 Whether appointing lambardars as polling and counting agents constitutes a corrupt practice under s.123(7)(f) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
  2. 2 Whether lambardars are revenue officers or village accountants within the meaning of s.123(7)(f) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951

Ratio Decidendi

Lambardars are not persons falling within clause (f) of section 123(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (they are excluded as village revenue officers) and accordingly the respondent did not commit a corrupt practice by appointing lambardars as his polling and counting agents.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs