T. C. BASAPPA versus T. NAGAPPA AND ANOTHER.

T. C. BASAPPA versus T. NAGAPPA AND ANOTHER.

The High Court erred in issuing certiorari, as the findings of the Election Tribunal did not show absence or excess of jurisdiction, nor was there a manifest error apparent on the face of the record; errors, if any, were not the kind justifying certiorari as they were not jurisdictional nor errors of law apparent on the record.

Parties
Appellant: T. C. Basappa; Respondent No. 1: T. Nagappa; Respondent No. 3: The Election Tribunal, Shimoga / Respondent No. 3 (state)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 May 1954
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Judgment of the Mysore High Court Dated 11 January 1954 Granting a Writ of Certiorari Quashing the Order of Election Tribunal, Shimoga Dated 15 January 1953
Outcome
Appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
Writ of Certiorari, Article 226 of the Constitution, Powers of High Courts, Judicial Review, Corrupt Practices in Elections
Constitutional Law Election Law Administrative Law Writ of Certiorari Article 226 of the Constitution Powers of High Courts Judicial Review Corrupt Practices in Elections

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

T. C. Basappa

Appellant

T. Nagappa

Respondent No. 1

The Election Tribunal, Shimoga / Respondent No. 3 (state)

Respondent No. 3

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Judgment of the Mysore High Court Dated 11 January 1954 Granting a Writ of Certiorari Quashing the Order of Election Tribunal, Shimoga Dated 15 January 1953

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What are the general principles governing the issue of certiorari under Article 226?
  2. 2 Was the High Court correct to issue a writ of certiorari in quashing the order of the Election Tribunal in this case?

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in issuing certiorari, as the findings of the Election Tribunal did not show absence or excess of jurisdiction, nor was there a manifest error apparent on the face of the record; errors, if any, were not the kind justifying certiorari as they were not jurisdictional nor errors of law apparent on the record.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed.

Orders

  • The writ of certiorari issued by the High Court is vacated.
  • No order as to costs of this appeal.