123 3a - Judgment Search Results
Samant N. Balkrishna and anr. Vs. V. George Fernandez and ors.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Feb-12-1969
Reported in: AIR1969SC1201; (1969)3SCC238; [1969]3SCR603
his consent and for his benefit'. It was said that they amounted to a corrupt practice Under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act.4. In Sub-paragraph F, a statement of Jagadguru Shankaracharya on cow slaughter
Shri Tukaram S. Dighole Vs. Shri Manikrao Shivaji Kokate
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-25-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR370; 2008(3)BomCR141; 2008(2)MhLj281
that the latter had delivered speeches which contained a communal appeal thereby violating the provisions contained in Section 123(3) of the Act. The contention is that the VHS cassette which was produced in Court contains speeches which
Sohan Singh Jodh Singh Kohli Vs. Chandrakanta Goyal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-01-1991
Reported in: 1991(3)BomCR357
This petition is to challenge the election of the respondent on the ground of corrupt practices under sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1951').2. The
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Sharad J. Rao Vs. Subhash Desai and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-03-1991
Reported in: 1991(4)BomCR156
representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1951). The charges are under section 123(1), bribery, by way of gift of various articles to the voters 123(3), appeal by respondent No. 1 or
Jaychand Dipchand Kasliwal Vs. Shirish S/O Vasantrao Kotwal and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALLMR99; 2001(2)BomCR350
null and void on the ground that the respondent No. 1 having committed corrupt practices defined under section 123(3A) and under section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petitioner also seeks an order
T.M. Chandrasekhar Vs. L.R. Shivaramegowda
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-27-1991
Reported in: ILR1992KAR444; 1991(3)KarLJ308
alleged against R-1 and his election agents under Sub-sections (1) (A)(a), (3), (3A), (4) and (6) of Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 ('the Act' for short hereafter) during this election. They are
Prit Pal Singh Vs. Ranjitrai and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-21-1983
Reported in: 25(1984)DLT462
(5) These issues raise the question whether the returned candidate indulged in corrupt practice as defined in Section 123(3) and (3A) of the Representation of People Act (the Act). It is said that Sant Harcharan Singh Longowal
Samant N. Balakrishna Vs. George Fernandez
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1969
Reported in: (1970)72BOMLR117
his consent and for his benefit'. It was said that they amounted to a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act.4. In sub-paragraph F, a statement of Jagadguru Shankaracharya on cow slaughter
Brahma Dutt Vs. Paripurna Nand Family and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-1972
Reported in: AIR1972All340
4 in Schedule I to the petition committed corrupt practice within the meaning of Section 123(3) and/or Section 123(3A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the election of respondent No. 1 is on that … 4 in Schedule I to the petition, committed corrupt practices within the meaning of Section 123(3) and Section 123(3A) ofthe Act, thereby rendering the election of respondent No. 1 void under Section 100(1)(b) of the Act.17. It
Jagir Singh and anr. Vs. Jasdev Singh and ors.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Feb-18-1975
Reported in: AIR1975SC1627; (1975)4SCC380; [1975]3SCR791; 1975(7)LC281(SC)
Legislative Assembly on many grounds out of which only the charge of corrupt practice under Section 123(3) and 123 (3A) of the Representation of the People Act now survives for consideration. Respondents 2 and 3 are the unsuccessful
Hover bars for counts · use +/− or drag to zoom · click a bar to filter by year
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free