NAHAKPAM INDRAJIT SINGH Vs. AMIN SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri M. Devananda, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/respondent No. 1 and Shri S. Biswajit, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1/petitioner.

(2.) This is application filed by the applicant/respondent No. 1 praying for striking out para 4.5 of the election petition on the ground that it is totally unfounded and baseless and in other words, the averments made in para 4.5 thereof are unnecessary and misleading in the mind of the general public. Since no reply thereto has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 1/petitioner, the averments made in the application shall be deemed to have been admitted by him and therefore, it has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant/respondent No. 1 that the said para 4.5 of the election petition is required to be struck out in terms of the provisions of Order 6 Rule 16 of CPC.

(3.) On the other hand, it has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1/petitioner that no reply is required to be filed in the matter and the purpose and intention of filing the application is to delay the proceedings of the election petition as is evident the facts and circumstances of the present case. It has further been submitted by him that the election petition was filed on 24/04/2017 to which a written statement was filed on 10/07/2017 and the replication thereto was filed on 24/08/2017.