SHARLF-UD-DIN versus ABDUL GANI LONE

SHARLF-UD-DIN versus ABDUL GANI LONE

The statutory requirement under Section 89(3) of the Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957, that every copy of the election petition intended for service on a respondent must be attested by the petitioner under his own signature, is mandatory, and the attestation by the advocate is not sufficient;...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Sharif-ud-Din; Respondent: Abdul Gani Lone
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 November 1979
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Judgment and Order of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in Election Petition No. 3 of 1977
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Attestation of Election Petition Copies, Mandatory Vs Directory Statutory Requirements
Election Law Procedural Law Attestation of Election Petition Copies Mandatory Vs Directory Statutory Requirements

Source-derived case record

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sharif-ud-Din

Appellant

Abdul Gani Lone

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Judgment and Order of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in Election Petition No. 3 of 1977

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is attestation by the advocate, instead of the petitioner under his own signature, sufficient compliance with Section 89(3) of the Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957?
  2. 2 Is Section 89(3) of the Act mandatory or directory? What is the consequence of non-compliance?

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory requirement under Section 89(3) of the Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957, that every copy of the election petition intended for service on a respondent must be attested by the petitioner under his own signature, is mandatory, and the attestation by the advocate is not sufficient; non-compliance attracts mandatory dismissal under Section 94 of the Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.