C M SUNDARAM Vs. T K NOUSHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was one of the candidates for election from No. 49 Palakkad Legislative Assembly Constituency for which poll was conducted on 27.4.1996 and results declared on 9.5.1996. The first respondent defeated the petitioner by a margin of 596 votes. According to the petitioner, the result of the election has been materially affected by violation of the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as "The Act") and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "The Rules"). So, he prays for a declaration that the election of the first respondent is void under S.100(1)(d)(iv) of the Act. He also prays for an order of resorting and recounting of the votes and for a declaration that he is duly elected.

(2.) A written statement was filed by the first respondent. Others did not choose to file any objection. In the written statement filed by the first respondent, apart from denying the entire averments contained in the Election Petition, it is stated in Para.16 that the "petition and the grounds referred to therein lacks in material facts and particulars and is defective on this account and since it does not disclose a cause of action, petition is liable to be dismissed".

(3.) The first respondent filed C.M.P. No. 5699 of 1996 in which he prayed for a preliminary hearing on the basis of his contention that in the absence of specific allegations of material irregularity and vague and ambiguous contentions, the Election Petition is liable to be dismissed. The application was allowed and the parties were given an opportunity to argue on the question whether the allegations, averments and material facts contained in the Election Petition are sufficient to satisfy the requirement of S.83(1)(a) of the Act and if not, the Election Petition is liable to be dismissed under S.86 of the Act.