KRISHAN GOYAL Vs. PURSHOTTAM LAL BADHWAR RAJAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 116-A read with Section 90 (3) of the Representation of the People Act. The respondent Sri Purshottam Lal Badhwar was elected and against his election an election petition was filed by the appellant Sri Krishna Goyal. That election petition has been dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that that petition has not complied with the provisions of Section 81 (3) of the Representation of the People Act.

(2.) The facts found by the Tribunal and ascertained by us from the record are that the petition was accompanied by the relevant number of copies of the petition which were signed on each page by the petitioner but the attestation regarding the copies being true copies under the signature of the petitioner had not been appended to the copies. There are some typing and other clerical mistakes in the copies but they are not substantial in the sense that the copies which had been filed are still copies of the petition and it cannot be said that they are something very different. In his statement the petitioner stated that he had attached to each copy a slip of paper on which he had written the relevant attestation and that he had signed each page of the copy so that no interpolation may be made and the pages of the copies may not be changed.

(3.) In this appeal the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant Sri Krishna Goyal was that the signatures of the petitioner on each page of the copy really amounted to the attestation of the copy and literal compliance with the form prescribed was not necessary. It was contended, on the other hand, by the learned counsel for the respondents that the signatures on each copy could not be treated to be for the purposes of attestation as the petitioner has himself clarified the purpose for which the signatures were put on it. Having considered this aspect of the matter we are satisfied that the contention of the appellant that because of the mere fact of having signed on each page of the copy, the signatures must be treated for the purposes of attesting as true copy, must be rejected. The petitioner has himself stated that he put the signatures so that any page may not be changed. This does not amount to attesting that the matter which was contained in that page was a true copy of the original petition. The case must therefore proceed on the basis that the copies were filed which were unattested.