Uddhav Thackeray vs Eknath Shinde : Live Updates From Supreme Court Hearing In Shiv Sena Case [March 1]

Kaul: As far as whip issue is concerned, on 21st there was a whip appointed by us. They reiterated their faith in another whip.

CJI DY Chandrachud: There was an existent whip, right?

Kaul: I'll answer that

Kaul: There must be overt specific acts- merging with another party, moving with MPs to say we don't have faith- these are overt acts. Our case was not that we didn't have faith in CM. Our argument was that you can't continue with MVA coalition.

Kaul: Your lordships in Yedurappa held that merely because a dissent is expressed within the party doesn't mean that you're acting against the party and you do not incur the wrath of Art 2(1)(a)

Kaul: I never argued that we split under the party or we merged. We said we represent the Shivsena and now we are recognised as Shivsena in this matter.

Kaul: My submission is that these two submissions aren't being made for the first time- that trust vote should not be taken if the government is formed and not when disqualifications are pending. These were made in Shivraj Chouhan and rejected too.

Sr Adv NK Kaul: Let me complete the reading of Shivraj Chouhan and then I will move to the timeline and facts.