CHANDRIKA PRASAD TRIPATHI Vs. SHIV PRASAD CHANPURIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following Judgment of the court was delivered by

(2.) THIS appeal by special leave arises outof an election petition filed by respondent 1 (No. 320 of1957) before the Election Commission, New Delhi, in which heprayed that the appellant's election to the Madhya PradeshLegislative Assembly from Bargi constituency should bedeclared to be void and that it should be further declaredthat he had himself been duly elected from the saidconstituency. The polling for the election in question wastaken on 9/03/1957, and the result was declared on 12/03/1957. Of the three candidates who had stood forelection, the appellant secured 9308 votes, respondent 1,8019 votes and the third candidate, respondent 2, 3210votes.

(3.) THE first point which calls for our decision in this appealis whether the High court was right in holding that theappeal preferred before it by respondent 1 was competent.THE appellant's contention is that the impugned order waspassed under s. 90, sub-s. (3) and no appeal is providedagainst such an order under s. 116A. Section 116A providesthat an appeal shall lie from every order made by thetribunal under s. 98 or s. 99 to the High court of the State in which thetribunal is constituted. We are not concerned in thepresent appeal with s. 99. THE case for respondent I isthat in substance and in law the impugned order must bedeemed to have been passed under s. 98. That is the viewwhich the High court has taken and we are satisfied that theHigh court is right.