ANIL R DESHMUKH Vs. ONKAR N WAGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is aggrieved by the dismissal of his election petition No. 3/95 by the Bench at Aurangabad of the High Court of Bombay on preliminary issue without trial.

(2.) The first respondent was declared elected at the election to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly held on 9-2-95 for 96 Pachora Constituency. The appellant filed the petition for declaring the election to be void and illegal and for declaring him as duly elected. In view of the limited scope of this appeal, it is unnecessary to refer to the allegations made in the said petition. Suffice it to mention that the petition contained allegations of certain corrupt practices as against the first respondent. An affidavit was filed along with the petition as required by the proviso to S. 83 (1)(c) of the Representation of the People Act (for short, the Act). The affidavit was attested and the endorsement of attestation contained the particulars as required by law.

(3.) When the copies of the petition, documents and the affidavit were served on the respondents, the copy of the affidavit did not bear the endorsement of attestation found on the original or the seal or stamp of the attesting officer. The appellant signed below the rubber stamp endorsement "Attested as true copy". But for the absence of the notarial endorsement, it was a true copy of the original as it was a xerox copy. The first respondent and the tenth respondent raised objections that the election petition should be dismissed in limine as the provisions of S. 83 (1) of the Act were not complied with. Besides the contention that the copies of the affidavit served on them were not true copies, the tenth respondent contended that a true copy of the petition was not supplied to him as required by S. 81 (3). The first respondent filed a separate application for dismissing the election petition for non-compliance with S. 81 (3) of the Act.