GOWRAMMA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a election petition challenging the election of a member of Gram Panchayath under Section 15 of the Karnataka Panchayath Raj Act, 1993 ('The Act', for short), whether the Civil Judge (Jr. Div) is a persona designata or a civil court? Whether the Civil Judge has the power under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code ('the Code' for short), or not while dealing with an election petition ? There are the two moot questions before this court. The said issues have arisen in the following factual matrix:

(2.) The election for the Gram Panchayath, namely Vatadahosahalli Gram Panchayath, was held on 2-6-2015. Both the petitioner, Smt. Gowramma, and the respondent No. 5, Smt.Nagalakshmamma had contested the election for the seat of member of the said Gram Panchayath. While the petitioner was elected as a member, Smt. Nagalakshamamma lost the election. Therefore, she filed an election petition before the Civil Judge (Jr. Div), and JMFC, Gudibanda challenging the petitioner's election as well as the election of one, Sri. Mallappa as members of the said Gram Panchayath. The said election petition was filed under Sections 15 and 19 of the Act. In her petition, Smt. Nagalakshamamma alleged that the Returning Officer had not signed nearly 100 ballot papers before entrusting it to the voters who had come for voting; one of the nine ballot papers, that have been approved to be received under postal ballot, the same has been illegally allowed to be polled in so far as the same relates to one K. N. Narasimhamurthy. For, his ballot paper has been received by misrepresentation and by forging his signature and the same has also been polled with a forged signature. It was, further, alleged that on the counting day, on 5-6-2015, the Returning Officer submitted the final counting report without giving the contestants or their agents a chance to point out the irregularities, or the illegalities in the holding of the election, and without giving them an opportunity to seek recounting of the valid votes. It was also alleged that some of the voters have exercised their voting rights in three different constituencies in utter violation of the code of conduct of the elections. Therefore, these irregularities and illegalities gave an unfair advantage to Smt. Gowramma to nominate a presidential candidate for the Gram Panchayath, which is about to commence. Thus, Smt. Nagalakshmamma sought the relief that the election be declared as illegal, the election result dated 5-6-2015 should be set aside, and fresh election be convened. Along with the election petition, Smt. Nagalakshmamma also filed an application for temporary injunction under Or. 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code for restraining Smt. Gowramma from continuing to function as a member of the Gram Panchayath, including restraining her from nominating any member for the post of President of the Gram Panchayath.

(3.) By order dated 7-7-2015, the learned Civil Judge allowed the application for temporary injunction under Or. 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code. Hence, this petition before this Court.