Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Supreme Court: Lambardars not revenue officers for election purposes</h1> <h3>Sardar Gurmej Singh Versus Sardar Pratap Singh Kairon</h3> Sardar Gurmej Singh Versus Sardar Pratap Singh Kairon - 1960 (1) SCR 909, AIR 1960 (SC) 122 Issues Involved:1. Interpretation of Section 123(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.2. Classification of a Lambardar under Section 123(7)(f) of the Act.3. Whether a Lambardar is a person in the service of Government.4. Corrupt practices under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.Issue 1: Interpretation of Section 123(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951The central question in this appeal concerns the true construction of the provisions of Section 123(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The section defines corrupt practices and specifies that obtaining assistance for the furtherance of a candidate's election from any person in the service of the Government, who belongs to certain specified classes, is deemed to be a corrupt practice. Clause (f) of sub-section (7) includes 'revenue officers including village accountants, such as, patwaris, lekhpals, talatis, karnams and the like but excluding other village officers.'Issue 2: Classification of a Lambardar under Section 123(7)(f) of the ActThe appellant argued that a Lambardar is both a revenue officer and village accountant within the meaning of clause (f) of sub-section (7) of Section 123 of the Act. The Election Tribunal initially held that a Lambardar was a revenue officer and village accountant in the service of Government. However, the High Court overturned this decision, concluding that Lambardars, although revenue officers, were excluded by the provisions of clause (f). The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's interpretation, stating that the clause 'revenue officers including village accountants' does not encompass Lambardars, who fall under 'other village officers' and are thereby excluded.Issue 3: Whether a Lambardar is a person in the service of GovernmentThe Supreme Court did not find it necessary to determine whether a Lambardar is a person in the service of Government, as it concluded that Lambardars are excluded from the definition of revenue officers under clause (f) of sub-section (7) of Section 123. The Court emphasized the clear legislative intent to distinguish between village accountants and other village officers, including Lambardars.Issue 4: Corrupt practices under the Representation of the People Act, 1951The appellant alleged that the respondent engaged Lambardars as counting and polling agents, constituting a corrupt practice under Section 123(7). However, the Supreme Court's interpretation of clause (f) led to the conclusion that Lambardars are not within the ambit of revenue officers or village accountants as defined in the Act. Thus, appointing Lambardars did not amount to a corrupt practice under the said provision.Conclusion:The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that Lambardars are excluded from the category of revenue officers and village accountants under Section 123(7)(f) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Consequently, engaging Lambardars as counting and polling agents did not constitute a corrupt practice. The Court emphasized the need for expeditious disposal of election petitions and dismissed the appeal with costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found