9911796707
TMI Blog1973 (9) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants. Hence this appeal. Sri Phadke, counsel for the appellants, has not covered the whole ground again; he has confined his arguments, to issues 2, 4, 5, 8 and 9. Thus the scope of inquiry is much narrower in the appeal. Issue No. 2 : Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter called the Act) specifies the grounds on which the election of a returned candidate may be set aside. According to s. 100(l) (d) (iii), the election may be set aside if the result of the election of the returned candidate has been materially affected by the improper reception, refusal or rejection of any vote or the reception of any vote which is void. Section 100(l) (d) (iv) provides that the election may be set aside if the result of the election of the returned candidate has been materially affected by any non-compliance with the provisions of the Constitution or of the Act or of any Rules or Orders made under the Act. Paragraphs 14, 15 and 16 of the election petition allege facts in respect of this issue. According to paragraph 14, votes were counted in the YMCA Hall on April 19, 1971. There were no proper arrangements for admission of the candidates and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rightly rejected. Rule 63 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 provides for the recount of votes. According to sub-rule (2) thereof recount of all votes or any part may be claimed on behalf of any candidate. An application should be made on his behalf to the Returning Officer. The application should state the ground on which the recount is claimed. The Returning Officer shall decide the question of recount and make an order either accepting or rejecting the application. The order should set forth the reasons. He may allow the application in whole or in part. The application for recount made by R. C. Sharma is Ex. P. 21 Paragraph I of the application states that more than 7000 votes were declared invalid. They were neither shown to him nor to his agents. Lighting arrangements were not satisfactory so that marks could not be properly read at the counting. Paragraph 6 states that the difference in votes obtained by Dhote and R. C. Sharma is marginal. The number of votes declared invalid has materially affected the result of the election. Many unauthorised persons entered the hall and they were interfering with the process of counting. Paragraph 8 states that the votes declared inva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1971 one Satya Narain Sharma issued a statement to the press in respect of this appeal. The next day, that is, April 17, Tarun Bharat, a newspaper, published a summary of his statement. The summary states that Satya Narain Sharma has expressed doubt about the genuineness of the letter by the Prime Minister calling upon the voters to vote for. Mr. Rikhabchand Sharma. The summary further states that there is no seal of the Prime Minister s Secretariat on this letter, nor it is mentioned to whom this letter is addressed. Satya Narain Sharma is also stated to have, expressed doubt that the Prime Minister, who has avoided even to mention the name of a candidate, would have issued a letter in support of him. The election petition states that Satya Narain Sharma was an agent of Dhote and that he issued the statement with the consent of Dhote. The statement was false and was believed to be false by Dhote. It was reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of the election of R. C. Sharma. Thus a corrupt practice under s. 123 (4) of the Act has been committed. The High Court has held that no such corrupt practice was committed by Dhote. It has held that Satya Narain Sharma did not m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at only the Narkesari Press in Nagpur has a mono-machine. The High Court has not believed him. He is the President of the Rashtriya Press person who printed the document C in the Narkesari Press, nor does he disclose the name of the person who delivered the printed copies to the appropriate authority in the Narkesari Press. Although he admitted in cross-examination that he had not been to any other press in Nagpur, he has said that except Narkesari Press no other press in Nagpur has a mono-machine. Evidently, this part of his evidence does not inspire confidence. Not having seen any other press in Nagpur, he could not say that the Narkesari Press alone has got a mono-machine. For these reasons, we find it difficult to place any reliance on his testimony. Dhote has examined Manohar Bokare in support of his case that the document 2R 20 was published in the Narkesari Press. Manohar Bokare is the Manager of the Job Section of the Narkesari Press. He says that he receives orders from customers, hands over printed material to them, examines and makes bills and prepares quotations for printing jobs. Initially, be was summoned by the appellants as their witness. But later they gave him up. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to the identity of the publisher thereof, signed by him and attested by two persons to whom he is personally known, is delivered by- him to the printer in duplicate; and (2) unless, within a reasonable time after the printing of the document, one copy of the declaration is sent by the printer, together with one copy of the document, if printed in the capital of the State to the Chief Electoral Officer and in any other case to the District Magistrate of the District in which it is printed. Manohar Bokare has admitted in cross-examination that he has neither obtained a declaration from B. M. Gaikwad, nor has he sent a copy of the document 2R 20 to the District Magistrate, Nagpur. This is incomplete and ineffective cross-examination. Manohar Bokare should have been also asked if he had any explanation for those omissions. The omissions might have been of some assistance to the appellants if Bokare could not give a proper explanation.The possibility of a good explanation cannot be ruled out.We agree with the High Court that no adverse inference can be drawn from these breaches of law. Fifthly, he could not give the exect date of the printing of 2R 20. But he has said that no record o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rma made any offending statements in those meetings with the consent of the Dhote. It has further held that they have failed to -prove that the statements attributed to Dhote, Pundalik Masurkar and Satya Narain Sharma constituted the corrupt practice specified in 123(4) of the Act. The ground of challenge in the petition is one covered by s. 100(l) (b) and not s. 100(l) (d). So we shall first examine the ,evidence to find out whether Pundalik Masurkar and Satya Narain Sharma made the allegedly offending statements with the consent of 831 Dhote. If his consent is not proved, it will not be necessary to examine the other aspects of this part of the issue. Nawi Mangalwari Meeting: 29-3-1971 The appellants have examined Marot Rao, Ishwar Giri, Shanker Laxman and Manhor Kashinath Kalankar. Dhote has examined himself, Pundalik Masurkar and Satya Narain Sharma. According to Ishwar Giri, Dhote was not present in the meeting while Pundalik Masurkar and Satya Narain Sharma were sneaking. Dhote came to the meeting just five minutes before the end of- Satya Narain Sharma s speech. Marto Rao and Shanker Laxman say nothing about the presence of Dhote during the speeches of Pundalik Masur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y from his notes, said that his notes show that Dhote was welcomed and therefore I say he was present from the very beginning. The note book of Manohar Kashinath Kalankar does not record that Dhote was present from the very beginning. it will not be safe to rely on his memory. It is true that Shesh Rao has noted in his note book that Dhote was welcomed. But from this fact it does not necessarily follow that he was present from the very being. He could be welcomed whenever he arrived in the meetings Dhote has said that when he reached the meeting, Satya Narain Sharma was halt way through his ,.speech . But we do not know when Satya Narain Sharma made the allegedly offending remarks in the course of his speech. It cannot therefore be said that those remarks were made in the presence of Dhote. So we agree with the High Court that the appellants have failed to prove that Dhote had given his consent to the speech of Satya Narain Sharma in this meeting. Maska Sath Meeting : 7-4-1971 : The witnesses of the appellants for this meeting are Manohar Kashinath Kalankar, Shesh Rao Kambale, Manohar Tajane, Yadao Shripurkar and Marot Rao, Dhote has examined himself and Satya Narain Sharm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Nawi Mangalwari and Ganji Peth, he has deposed from memory that Dhote was present from the very beginning of those meetings. It may be observed that he has made no such note in his note-book. We have already held that Dhote arrived in those meetings when Satya Narain Sharma was about to finish his speech. We have disbelieved his statement made from memory. It seems to us that he has ventured to speak from memory in order to help the appellants and R. C. Sharma. Third, Manohar Tajane, Shesh Rao- Kambale and Marot Rao say nothing in their evidence about the presence of Dhote during the speech of Gunwant Nagpure and Satya Narain Sharma. Marot Rao is one of the appellants in this appeal. The note alleged to have made by Manohar Kashinath Kalankar in his note-book does not get support from their testimony. Fourth, Yadao Shripurkar said that Dhote was present when Satya Narain Sharma was speaking. The High Court has disbelieved him. We see no reason to differ with the High Court. He has admitted that he was the Vice-President of the Nagpur City Congress Committee. He has also admitted that he has canvassed and given speeches in support of R. C. Sharma He has distributed cards for R. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k that the High Court has rightly held that the appellants have failed to prove the consent of Dhote to the speech of Satya Narain Sharma in this meeting. The Case against Dhote We shall now examine the appellants, evidence against Dhote. The High Court has elaborately discussed and commented upon the evidence. As we are in agreement with the High Court, we shall indicate only the salient features of the evidence. Nawi Mangalwari Meeting-29-3-1971 It is alleged in paragraph 23(a) of the election petition that Satya Narain Sharma and Pundik Masurkar said that Rikhabchand Sharma ;is a man having no character and is a smuggler of gold. Satya Narain Sharma, it is alleged, also said that Rikhabchand Sharma has taken a bribe of Ps. 5 lakhs from powerloom owners and, therefore, the recommendations of Ashok Mehta Committee to the effect that the Coloured saris should not be printed on powerloom has not been given effect to. It is further alleged that Dhote also made personal attack on Shri Sharma saying that he has no character. In his written statement Dhote has admitted that he had spoken in the meeting. But he said that he made no adverse remarks against Rikhabchand Sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he political murder of my friend Deoghare. Corrupt Sharma has secured 500 powerlooms for the Momins. He has taken ₹ 5 lakhs from them and he has distributed that amount lavishly for election purposes. He runs distillation centres, gambling dens and brothels in Nagpur. Obviously be is making preceptible improvements on the pleading in paragraph 23(a) of the petition. Shanker Laxman Nandankar also is a chance, witness. Nawi Mangalwari is three miles from his house. He says that he went to the house of his aunt s son who is living there because he was called by the latter to his house. But for this explanation he would not have been present in the meeting. Admittedly, he did not take down notes of the speeches. Although several speakers spoke in the meeting, he does not remember the speeches of the speakers other than Dhote, Pundlik Masurkar and Satya Narain Sharma. According to him, Pundlik Masurkar said that Rikhabchand Sharma was selling land which he had purchased during his Mayorlity of the Nagpur City Corporation and using that money for election. He also said that Rikhabchand Sharma was carrying on smuggling business . Satya Narain Sharma said that Rikhabchand Sharma w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld have failed to inform Rikhabchand Sharma or the Congress Election Office. He is a man of weak memory. He could not reproduce the speech of Satya Narain Sharma which he had repeated earlier in his evidence. He, could not explain as to how the appellants came to know that he was present in the meeting. There is variance between the pleading and hi evidence as regards the speeches of Satya Narain Sharma and Dhote,. According to him, Satya Narain Sharma said that Rikhabchand Sharma was the protector of the goondas and that he arranged for regular payments to be made to the police by person who maintained gambling dens and that he also indulged in smuggling gold. Dhote, according to him, said that Rikhabchand Sharma was a Bhrasbtachari (corrupt) Dr. Ram Narain has appeared as a witness for Rikhabchnd Sharma. He was the counting agent of Rikhabchand Sharma and was in the hall where counting was done from 8.00 a.m. to 10.00 p.m. He was a Congress candidate in the Nagpur Corporation election in 1969. He is an active member of the Congress. So, be is a highly interested witness. He has admitted that he did not inform Rikhabchand Sharma and the appellants about his presence in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arayan Ganjli (one of them) and Shankerlal. The High Court says that the evidence of the former is thoroughly unreliable and counsel for the appellants did not refer to his evidence at all. Shankerlal, the High Court has found, did not attend the meeting. Laxminarayan is one of the appellants. He is accordingly an interested witness. Admittedly, he took no notes of the speech. Although he says that both the appellants gave information to the lawyer who drafted their election petition, he did not inform the lawyer about his presence in the meeting and about the offending speech delivered by Dhote. He makes improvement upon the pleading. Paragraph 23 (d) of the petition alleges that Dhote said that Rikhabchand Sharma is a corrupt man supported by corrupt Naik Government. In his evidence, he says that Dhote said that Pikhabchand Sharma has become rich by indulging in corruption and black-market. Rikhabchand Sharma was trying to purchase votes by money. A corrupt man like Rikhabchand Sharma could not usher in the socialist society. He was the symbol of sin in the city of Nagpur. Shankerlal could not tell the name of the President of the meeting. Admittedly, he took no notes of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aklal Dhote said that he did not want to say anything about Sri Sharma and that they would learn about him after reading Gram Sewak , he says that Dhote first said that he did not want to speak anything about Sri Rikhabchand Sharma and that the audience knew about the work of Rikhabchand Sharma. Thereafter he says that Dhote further made the aforesaid false statement regarding the character of Rikhabchand Sharma. Thus he seeks to reconcile his statement to that of Janaklal. Like the High Court, we are unable to rely on the evidence of these witnesses. Police witnesses We shall now consider the evidence of the two C.I.D. Shorthand writers, Manohar Kashinath Kalankar and Shesh Rao Kambale. Manohar Kashinath Kalankar was it is said present in the Nawi Mangalwari, Ganji Peth, Maska Sath, Chamar Nala and Kasturchanci Park meetings. Shesli Rao Kambale was present in the Gauji Peth, Maska Sath, Chamar Nala and Kasturchand Park meetings. One or the other of them took down the notes of the speeches of Pundalik Masurkar, Satya Narain Sharma, Dhote and other speakers. The notes were taken down in short-hand except in the case of Dhote s speech in the Nawi Mangalwari meeting. That speech w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irst appeal from decree, on principle, will also apply to an election appeal under section 11.6A. It has been so extended by this Court. Whether we should believe the witnesses or not involves how far we should enter into facts. No doubt, an appeal before this Court under S. 116A is an appeal. . .. on facts and law; still the practice of the courts has uniformaly been to give the greatest assurance to the assessment of evidence made by the Judge who hears the witnesses and watches their demeanour and judges of their credibility in the first instance. In an appeal the burden is on the appellant to prove how the judgment under appeal is wrong. To establish this he must do something more than merely ask for a reassessment of the evidence. He must show wherein the assessment has gone wrong. (See Narbada Prasad v. Chhagaul([1969] 1 S. C. R. 499 at p. 504 by Hidayatullah C. J). It should also be borne in mind that in the instant case the High Court has held Dhote not guilty of the alleged corrupt practice which is a quasil-criminal charge. This Court should be slow to disagree with the finding of the High Court based on appreciation of evidence. (D. P. Misra v. Kam Narain Sharma(1971] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mphasis added). S. 161. Any writing referred to under the provisions of the two last preceding sections must be produced and shown to the adverse party if he requires it; such party may, if he pleases, cross-examine the witness thereupon. There are thus three conditions for admitting their evidence. The first condition is that the notes must have been taken down by them as and when the speeches were being delivered or so soon afterwards that the speeches were fresh in their memory. The second condition is that the witnesses must be sure that the speeches have been correctly recorded by them. The third condition is that the notes must be produced and shown to the adverse party if he requires them. Such party may cross-examine them if he so desires. It does not appear to have been the case of Dhote that the witnesses were not present in the meetings except one in which the offending speeches were delivered. The witnesses have stated that they took down the notes of the speeches as and when they were being delivered. Accordingly, the first condition is satisfied. Counsel for Dhote says that the third condition was not satisfied. The transcribed notes of the speeches were given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resscha might have been missed. Now, there is a world of difference between Bhrashtachari Sharma and Bhrashtachari Congresscha Sharma . The former means fallen conduct Sharma ; the latter means Sharma of the fallen conduct Congress. if Dhote had really said Bhrashtachari Congresscha Sharma it would not amount to a corrupt practice. This admission of Kalankar in his crossexamination casts doubt on the accuracy of his recording of Dhote s speech in this meeting. Two other circumstances also enhance our doubt. Admittedly, Dhote spoke in Marathi. Kalankar is not a Marathi shorthand writer. So he says that he took down the speech of Dhote in long hand in Marathi. It is quite possible that in the long hand recording of a speech some words might be missed by the reporter. Again, while the election petition alleges that in this meeting Dhote said only that Rikhabchand was a characterless man (Charitrahin), in the aforesaid extract the charges ire of Rikhabehand Sharma being of fallen-conduct and of the electors getting money in the election. On account of all these circumstances, we are not sure that the extract is a correct recording of the speech of Dhote. Hence we will ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . He has annexed a schedule to the written statement. The schedule gives a list of 25 cases against Dhote. On May 4, 1964 Dhote along with his associates assaulted Head Constable Deo Narain who was on duty at Yeotmal. In a public meeting held at Pimpari he is alleged to have delivered a speech instigating the people for looting godowns and assaulting public servants. On April 11, 1968 he delivered a speech in a public meeting at Hinganghat instigating people to assault government officials. On October 17, 1968 at Akola Railway Station he forcibly entered into a first class compartment in which the late Shri Gopalrao Khedekar, a minister of Maharashtra, was travelling, by pushing the police inspector aside. On May 5, 1970 he is said to have delivered a speech at Wardha threatening Police Sub-inspector Pawar for prosecuting Forward Block workers and demanding his transfer and threatening revenge if he was not transferred. On November 22, 1970, Dhote along with his followers led a procession and is alleged to have threatened the police and caused damage to the police wireless van. Secondly, Manohar Kashinath Kalankar has evidently made exaggerations in his oral evidence. For instan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... There is no doubt that if he were really present in the meeting, convincing police documentary evidence will be available to prove his presence. He has admitted that for going to the meeting a conveyance was given to him by the Department. No evidence has been produced to prove this fact also. The meeting was called to celebrate Ambedkar Jayanti day. Dhote spoke in Hindi. But in the whole of Dhote s speech, which Kalankar has noted down in his note-book, there is a solitary reference to the late B. R. Ambedkar and that too in Marathi. He is reported to have said : Today we are celebrating the Jayanti of a great man. (emphasis added). The use of tile mild epithet great (and that too only once) is rather starting and unexpected of Dhote. He had gone there with an eye on vote-catching. He should accordingly have devoted the major part of his speech in recognising the qualities and services of the late Dr. B. R. Ambedkar to the downtrodden and thus winning their heart and mind. The probability is that he would have merely alluded to the aspect of election from the side-lines. But his entire speech as recorded by Kalankar is devoted to election. It is highly improbable to expect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r he is interested in denial. But Rajababu Ganpatrao Meshram s evidence cannot be overlooked. According to Kalankar, he presided over the meeting. He has deposed: Ambedkar Jayanti falls on 14th of April. On 14th April, a meeting was held in Chamar Nala locality. This meeting was called by Azad Bhim Sena in connection with the Ambedkar Jayanti. I presided over this meeting He said that the photograph of Dr.B.R.Ambetker and Buddha were placed on the dais, and that they were garlanded. According to him, Ajabrao Ingle spoke about the Bauddha community and Dr. Ambedkar. The other speakers dwelt on the work (A Dr. Ambedkar for the labourers. In his cross-examination on behalf of Rikhabchand Sharma, he admitted that Dhote also spoke about the election. In his cross-examination on behalf of the appellants, he said that Dhote first spoke, on the problems of labour, then on Di-. Ambedkar and in the concluding part of Ms speech be said that he was standing as a candidate in the election. The High Court appears to have believed his evidence. He does not seem to be an interested witness. He has stood the test of cross-examination. There appears to be no reason why we should not believe his te ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The High Court has given a uniform meaning of corruption to the word bhrashtachar in the reported speeches of Dhote. It appears to us from the context of the Ganji Peth speech that Dhote might have used the word bhrashtachar in the sense indicated by us. In any case, the context does not plainly exclude this innocuous interpretation. It is wellknown that a person who takes liquor, etc. is even now regarded by the common folk as a bhrashtachari . So it cannot be said that the aforesaid portion of Dhote s speech is susceptible of one and only one construction which will establish a corrupt practice. And Dhote cannot be put in peril on an ambiguity. In the Maska Sath meeting Dhote is reported to have said : This is a war between truth and power. We have to see whether truth wins or power wins. We have to see whether truth wins or power loses, whether falsehood wins, or truth wins. We have to see whether corruption wins or purity wins. By no stretch and strain of these words, it is possible to make out a corrupt practice. In this speech Dhote dose not in our view make, any statement of fact in relation to the, personal character or conduct of Rikhabchand Sharma. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evidence, and three others do not make out a corrupt practice. As regards the remaining one recorded by Kalankar in the Chamar Nala meeting, we have earlier expressed doubt about his presence in the meeting. So summaries will not advance the case of the appellants. it will remain as it is now. In short, it will be a mere waste of time to summon them. The High Court has exhibited not only extracts from the reported speeches of Dhote but has also admitted the full reports of his speeches. It is argued on behalf of the appellants that the full reports establish other instances of the pleaded corrupt practice against Dhote. The High Court was also addressed on this aspect. It did not accept the. argument. Nor can we. The other instances were not pleaded in the petition. The appellants did not seek to amend the petition by incorporating those instances. Dhote got no opportunity to deny them or to disprove them. He did not even cross examine the police witnesses with respect to those instances. He confined his cross-examination mainly to the instances pleaded in the petition. Taking notice of the new instances will cause serious prejudice to him. Issue No. 9: It is alleged that in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by them. He has stated in cross-examination that he maintains accounts relating to the publication of the Gram Sewak. He further said : If I am asked to produce these tomorrow, I am willing to do so. No such demand was made on behalf of the appellants. His evidence supports the evidence of Satya Narain Sharma that the Gram Sewak was sold and not distributed free outside the meeting. There is nothing in- his evidence to discredit his testimony. He has been believed by the High Court. So we share the view of the High Court that it was sold by hawkers only. Atal Bahadur Singh has admitted that he had been canvassing for Dhote in his ward. He has also admitted that he had pasted certain posters in his ward soliciting support for Dhote at his expense. He has also admitted that he had been working with Dhote in certain associations and in the Maha Vidarbha Andolan. His association with and his canvassing for Dhote could not establish that the Gram Sewak was published with the consent of Dhote. Evidence shows that when Dhote was canvassing from door to door in the ward in which Atal Bahadur Singh resides, he was not accompanied by the latter. This will show that the latter was work ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y highly interested witnesses. It is surprising that no independent witness has been examined by the appellants in order to prove distribution of the Gram Sewak by Dhote, especially because the meeting was attended by a large number of important reason. It has come in evidence of other witnesses of the appellants that the meeting was addressed by Dhote from an improvised dais or a truck which was used in the procession before the meeting. These witnesses were cross-examined about the nature of the dais. None of them stated that the dais was improvised on the truck. Had they really attended the meeting, they could not have failed to notice this striking improvisation. Dhote has denied that he had distributed the copies of the Gram Sewak. Having regard to the nature of the appellants evidence, we are in entire agreement with the High Court that they have failed to prove the distribution of the Gram Sewak by Dhote in the meeting. Govind Marot Rao has deposed that B. M. Gaikwad had given him a copy of the Gram Sewak in the Chitnis Park from where the procession started before the meeting. Now, the distribution of the Gram Sewak in the Chitnis Park is not pleaded in the petition. D. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therwise direct-,, he deemed to be part of the costs. Section 119 deals with costs in the cause It reads : Costs shall be in the discretion of the High Court : Provided that where a petition is dismissed under clause (a) of section 98, the returned candidate shall be entitled to the costs incurred by him in contesting the petition and accordingly the High Court shall make an order for costs in favour of the returned candidate. (emphasis added). It may be observed that the word incurred occurs both in section 96 and section 119. Incurred means actually spent . The petition was dismissed by the High Court under cl. (a) of s.98. Accordingly, it was incumbent on the High Court to award costs to Dhote. But he is entitled to only such costs as are shown to have been incurred by him. Admittedly, there is no proof of payment of any fee to counsel by Dhote. So he is not entitled to the amount of ₹ 400/- per diem awarded by the High Court. However, he will be entitled to any other costs which are shown to have been incurred by him. Having regard to the foregoing discussion, the appeal is allowed only with respect to counsel s fees awarded to Dhote and the respondent N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
