PRIT PAL SINGH Vs. RANJIT RAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this election petition the petitioner,Pritpal Singh, has challenged the election of the returned candidate, RanjitRai Sharma, respondent No. 1. Both of them were contesting candidates atthe Metropolitan Council election from the Metropolitan Constituency ofPaharganj No. 44 held on 5-2-1983. Respondent No. 1 was declared as asuccessful candidate. He won by III votes. At the first count he was declered elected by a margin of 113 votes. On a recount the margin was reduced to111 votes. So the election petitioner is his closest rival.

(2.) The petitioner seeks to set aside the election of respondent No. 1 onfour grounds : (1) that respondent No. 1 indulged in corrupt practice, (2) 336valid votes of the petitioner were improperly rejected, (3) 85 votes from theballot boxes of Municipal Corporation election were not counted, and (4) 89void votes were counted in favour of respondent No. 1. It is not necessaryto set out the pleadings of the parties at any great length as they are sufficiently reflected in the following issues and the discussion that follows those issues :

(3.) Mr. Sapra on behalf of the petitioner conceded that these issues maybe decided against him. By my order dated 11-8-1983 I decided these twoissues against the petitioner.Before I take up other issues I must mention that on an application (C.M. No. 2980 of 1983) made by respondent No. 1 arguments were heard on allthe remaining issues as it was urged that the parties need not go to aprotractedtrial and that evidence was unnecessary. It was contended that the petitiondid not disclose a cause of action and the allegations, even if they are acceptedas true, will not enable the petitioner to have the election of respondent No. 1set aside. So without evidence the matter was argued.Issues No. 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14