https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169710 In an election dispute involving disputed ballot counterfoil signatures, the Supreme Court cautioned that a court should not invalidate votes by relying solely on its own comparison of handwriting under Section 73 of the Evidence Act where numerous signatures are contested and witnesses deny the alleged voting irregularities. The Court held that such a comparison is unsafe without appropriate expert assistance or reliable admitted signatures, especially when the consequence would be to annul an election. On the facts, the votes treated as void on that basis could not validly support the finding that the returned candidate had lost, and the declaration of the other candidate as duly elected was therefore unsustainable. en-us Tue, 06 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 May 2015 14:34:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169710 In an election dispute involving disputed ballot counterfoil signatures, the Supreme Court cautioned that a court should not invalidate votes by relying solely on its own comparison of handwriting under Section 73 of the Evidence Act where numerous signatures are contested and witnesses deny the alleged voting irregularities. The Court held that such a comparison is unsafe without appropriate expert assistance or reliable admitted signatures, especially when the consequence would be to annul an election. On the facts, the votes treated as void on that basis could not validly support the finding that the returned candidate had lost, and the declaration of the other candidate as duly elected was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 06 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169710