<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1973 (4) TMI 124 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289873</link>
    <description>In a composite election petition seeking both avoidance of the returned candidate&#039;s election and a declaration that another candidate was duly elected, the returned candidate may contest the rival claim only by strictly complying with the recrimination procedure under section 97 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The statutory scheme requires the prescribed notice, particulars and security within time; absent compliance, votes in the returned candidate&#039;s favour cannot be relied on to defeat the alternative claim. A recount ordered for irregularities does not bypass this bar, and concessions made during recount cannot confer jurisdiction or override the statutory requirement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2020 13:02:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=620756" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1973 (4) TMI 124 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289873</link>
      <description>In a composite election petition seeking both avoidance of the returned candidate&#039;s election and a declaration that another candidate was duly elected, the returned candidate may contest the rival claim only by strictly complying with the recrimination procedure under section 97 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The statutory scheme requires the prescribed notice, particulars and security within time; absent compliance, votes in the returned candidate&#039;s favour cannot be relied on to defeat the alternative claim. A recount ordered for irregularities does not bypass this bar, and concessions made during recount cannot confer jurisdiction or override the statutory requirement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289873</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>