ANUPAM PATHAK Vs. DINESH CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred as the 'CPC') has been filed assailing the order 28/2/2025 passed by the District Judge, Budaun rejecting the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC filed in Election Petition No. 1 of 2023 by the returned candidate.

(2.) Facts, leading to filing of the present revision, are that revisionist alongwith other candidates contested the election for the post of Chiarman of Nagar Panchayat Mudiya Dhureki. The elections were held on 11/5/2023 and the counting of the votes was held on 13/5/2023. Revisionist having received 1495 votes was declared as winning candidate. Respondent no. 1 Dinesh Chandra @ Dinesh Chandra Bhatt filed an Election Petition No. 1 of 2023 questioning the election of the revisionist. The election petition was contested and written statement was filed. Thereafter, the issues were also framed. On 30/1/2025 the revisionist filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 read with Sec. 151 CPC for rejection of the plaint. The election tribunal by the order impugned had rejected the said application filed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Hence, present revision.

(3.) Sri Kartikeya Saran, learned counsel appearing for the revisionist, submitted that the power to question a municipal election under The U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 (hereinafter referred as the 'Act of 1916') is provided under Sec. 19 by presentation of an election petition. Sub- sec. 2 (b) of Sec. 19 of the Act of 1916 specifically bars the institution of an election petition on the ground that any non-compliance with the act or rules, or of any mistake in the form required thereby, unless such irregularity has materially affected the result of the election.