High CourtsSingle Bench(2013) 03 KAR CK 0001

G.N.R. Babu vs K. Muthappa and Others

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 21 March 2013 · Citation: (2013) 4 KarLJ 495

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.S. Bopanna, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 38050 of 2012 (LB-ELE)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 352 words

A.S. Bopanna, J.—After arguing the matter for sometime, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the petitioner be permitted to withdraw the petition with the observation that the ground urged in this petition would be available to the petitioner, if ultimately the election petition is decided against the petitioner. Further the learned Senior Counsel would also point out that the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner herein i.e., the respondent 2 before the Court below should be allowed liberty to bring it to the notice of the Election Tribunal the scope of the pleadings while tendering evidence before the Election Tribunal. In this regard, the law is well-settled and such aspects would be regulated by the Election Tribunal while considering the nature of pleadings and the evidence that could be tendered by the parties. Hence, these aspects are left open to be urged before the Election Tribunal.

2.

Further the Election Tribunal would also consider and dispose of the election petition itself as expeditiously as possible and in the event of there being any delay, it would be open for the learned Counsel appearing for the parties to move a memo before the Election Tribunal indicating that the election petition be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and the Election Tribunal will consider such request and dispose of the petition in accordance with law.

3.

At this stage, the learned Senior Counsel would submit that in view of the present development, there would be necessity for the petitioner herein to file a application to recall the earlier order made by Court below for listing the case for hearing since he may have to get himself examined further or if he is required to be cross-examined he would have to tender himself. The learned Counsel for the respondents submit that any such procedure for completing evidence in any event would not be opposed, if the petitioner herein makes himself available for evidence and cross-examination without seeking unnecessary adjournments. Liberty granted in respect of the above requests. With the above observations, the petition is disposed of as withdrawn.