Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Manipur · body

2025 DAILYLAW 188 (MAN)

SYED MURTAZA AHMED AND ANOTHER v. SERAM NEKEN SINGH AND 2 OTHERS

MC(El.Pet.)/23/2025 · 2026-04-17

Ahanthem Bimol Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 Suply Item Nos. 14 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL MC(El. Pet.) No. 23 of 2025 Syed Murtaza Ahmed & Anr …Applicant/s Vrs. Seram Neken Singh & 2 Ors …Respondent/s -B E F O R E- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH 18.04.2026 Md. Syed Murtaza Ahmed, the applicant appeared in person and Mr. BR Sharma, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the respondent no. 1, none appeared on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 & 3 despite service of notice. The present application has been filed by the applicant who are the conducting counsel on behalf of the Election Petitioner with a prayer for allowing their determination as counsel for the Election Petitioner in El. Pet. No. 4 of 2022 and respondent no. 1 in the connected El. Recr. Pet. No. 2 of 2022. It has been submitted by the applicant that as the said Election Petitioner did not give any cooperation to them, they are not in a position to conduct the proceeding of the said election petition as well as the connected election recrimination petition and as such, the present application has been filed for allowing their determination as counsel of the said election petitioner. Lucy Gurum ayum Digitally signed by Lucy Gurumayum Date: 2026.04.18 16:33:07 +05'30' Page 2 It has also been submitted by the applicant that notice of the present application has been duly served upon the said Election Petitioner/respondents no. 1 and proof of service of such notice is found on record. Despite service of notice of the present application none appeared on behalf of the said election petitioner/respondent no. 1. Accordingly, the present application is allowed. Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the said Election Petitioner/respondent no. 1 as early as possible by any possible means of communication including hard copy and soft copy. With the aforesaid directions, the present application is disposed of. JUDGE Lucy