LexSRI SRI SRI KISHORE CHANDRA SINGH DEO versus BABU GANESH PRASAD BHAGAT AND OTHERS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
:S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 919 Also, "to give the names of all persons, if any, who have been proved at the trial to have been guilty of any corrupt or illegal practice and the nature of that practice." Their duty does not end by declaring an election to be void or not because section 99 provides that in addi- tion to that "at the time of making an order under section 98 the tribunal shall also make an order etc ...... " A number of allegations were made in the petition about corruption and illegal practices, undue influence and bribery. It was the duty of the tribunal not only to enquire into those allegations, as it did, but also to complete the enquiry by recording findings about those allegations and either condemn or clear the candidate of the charges made. We make no order about costs. BosE J.-I agree on all but one point. I have :some doubt about the reason given by my learned brother which is based on the d<:hnition of "candidate" ·in the Act. I prefer not to express any opinion on :that one point. Case remanded. Agent for the appellant: Ratnaparkhi Anant Govind. Agent for respondent No. 1. .-1.. D. Mathur. SRI SRI SRI KISHORE CHANDRA SINGH DEO v. 'BABU GANESH PRASAD BHAGAT AND OTHERS. [MuKHERJEA, VIVIAN BosE, GHULAM HASAN and VENKAIARAMA AYYAR TJ.) Indian Registration Act (XVI of 1908), ss. 32, 33-"Resides", .1neaning -of-Pou•er-of-attorney containing mistaken endorsement, .effect of-Applicability of ss. 32 and 33 to such a case-Legal .effect of decision under s. 33(1), proviso (i). 1954 Kaj Krus/ma Bose v. Binod Kanungo and Others, la.r J. 1954 Marth 9. 1954 Sri Sri Sri Kishore Chandra Singh Dto v. Babu Ganesh Prasad Bhagat and Othrrs. 920 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1954] The word "resides" in s. 33( 1) (a) of the Indian Registra- tion Act, 1908, is not defined in the statute. It contemplates not only permanent residence but also temporary residence. Resid- ence only connotes that a person eats, drinks and sleeps at that place and it is not ~:ecessary that he should own it. For purposes of s. 32( c) of the Act, a power-of-attorney needs, in vie\v of the provisions of s. 33 of the Act, no registration but is only required to be execcted before and authenticated by the Registrar. Hence an endorse1nent mistakenly 1nad::: on such power-of-attorney that it was presented for registration must be ignored and does not affect the validity of subsequent authentica- tion by the Registrar \vhich \Vas an independent act complete in itself and valid under s. 33. A decision of the Registrar under s. 33( 1) proviso (i) of the Indian llegistration Act that an applicant is suffering from bodily infirmity and is unable to attend the Registration Office or court without risk or serious inconvenience relates to a matter of mere procedure and even if erroneous does not affect his jurisdiction .. The finding is on a matter which is within his exclusive juris- diction, and cannot be questioned in a court of la\v. fambu Prasad v. Maham mad Aftar Ali Khan ( 42 I.A. 22), Sharat Chandar Basu v. Bijay Chand Mahtab (64 I.A. 77), Ma Pwa May v. Chettiar Firm (56 I.A. 379) and Mujibunnissa v. Abdul' Rahim (28 I.A. 15) referred to. CML APPELLATE JuRrsmcTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 1 and 2 of 1949. Appeals from the Judgment and Decree dated the 22nd December, 1942, of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in First Appeals Nos. 10 and 11 of 1939 ansmg out of the Judgment and Decree dated the 23rd November, 1936, of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Berhampore in Original Suit No. 11 of 1935 .. D. V. Narasinga Rao and M. S. K. Sastri for the· appellant. S. L. Chhibber and R. C. Prasad for respondents Nos. 1-4, 6-9, 11 and 12. 1954. March 9. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATARAMA AYYAR J.-These appeals anse out of a suit instituted by the respondents to enforce a mortgage deed, Exhibit A, dated 5th April, 1923, exe- cuted by the defendant in favour of one Radha. Prasad Bhagat. The subject-matter of the mortgage is an estate called the Bodogodo Zemin situated in S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 921 what was the District of Ganjam in the Province of Madras and now comprised in the State of Orissa, and governed by the provisions of the Madras Impartible Estates Act II of 1904. The mortgage is for Rs. 1,25,000 and the deed recites that a sum of Rs. 12,500 was advanced
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.