KALLIAH NAGAIAH Vs. BASAPPA TIRAKAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Art.226 of the Constitution has been referred to a Division Bench by Rama Jois, J, as in his opinion there appeared tto be conflict between the decision of a Bench of this Court in Hayat Beig v. Munivenkate Gowda, 1972 1 MysLJ. 121. and the decision of a single Judge in Channegowda V.State of Karnataka, 1975 2 KaiiLJ, 235.

(2.) This petition is directed against the judgment of the District Judge, Dharwar, in an election petition under Sec.41 (4) of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 (hereinafter to be referred to as'the Act'), and Rule 45(2) of the Rules thereunder (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') .

(3.) Petitioner and respondent-1 were candidates for an election to the office of the Chairman of the Agricultural produce Market Committee, Eanibennur. The Returning Officer declared that each of them had seemed seven votes. On drawing lots, the petitioner was declared as having been elected. Respondent-1 challenged that election in an election petition before the learned District Judge, who by the impugned judgment, set, aside the result of the election.