TAI NIKIO Vs. TADAR MANGKU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P. K. Tiwari, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. T. Lamgu, learned counsel for the applicant/respondent. And also heard Mr. Rituraj Biswas and Mr. D.J. Kapil, learned counsel for the opposite party/election petitioner.

(2.) This is an application under Order VI Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking striking out pleadings in the connected Election Petition No. 7(AP)/2024, on the ground that the same are unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous and vexatious.

(3.) The opposite party/election petitioner has filed the Election Petition No. 7(AP)/2024, for declaration of the election of the applicant/respondent from 19 Nyapin (ST) Assembly Constituency to be void under Sec. 98(b) of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the RP Act, 1951 in short) on the ground of commission of corrupt practice by a returned candidate or his election agent or by any other person with the consent of the returned candidate or his election agent as provided under Sec. 100 (1)(b) of the RP Act, 1951 and also for a declaration of the election of the applicant/respondent under Sec. 98(c) of the RP Act, 1951 and under Sec. 101 (b) of the said Act for having received majority of valid votes, i.e. but for the votes obtained by the returned candidate by corrupt practice, the petitioner would have obtained a majority of the valid votes.