AMRIT LAL BASUMATARI Vs. ABDUL MUHIB MAZUMDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In election petition No.23 of 1989, the election petitioner has claimed two reliefs, one under Section 100 for declaration that the election of the respondent-2 Sri Basumatary, the returned candidate, is void, and other under Section 101(1) for declaring respondent-1 Hiteswar Saikia to have been duly elected. The respondent-2 filed a recrimination petition No.18 of 1989 under Section 97(1) calling in question the election of the respondent-1 Hiteswar Saikia, is, the respondent-1 Hiteswar Saikia in whose favour a declaration is claimed by the election petitioner cannot be said to have been validly elected.

(2.) The question for determination is whether the recrimination petition is to be heard together along with, the election petition or separately as an independent petition.

(3.) Mr. B. N. Sen, the learned counsel for the election petitioner, has submitted that on the facts and circumstances of the case the present recrimination petition is to be tried together along with the election petition. Mr. D. N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent 2, has contended that the recrimination petition shall be tried as an independent petition after the question in regard to the validity of the election of the returned candidate is decided. In order to support his contention he has relied on a decision of the Supreme Court in Jabar Singh v. Genda Lal, AIR 1964 SC 1200.