INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION HARYANA STATE Vs. KAMAL GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is against the order of the Court below whereby petitioners No. 1 and 2 have been restrained from handing over the charge to petitioner No. 3 who had been elected as President of the Indian Medical Association, Haryana State Branch, till the disposal of the suit.

(2.) BRIEFLY put, pursuance to the election programme for the State President and its Vice President, petitioner No. 3 Dr. Ved Beniwal and respondent Dr. Kamal Gupta filed their nomination for the President of the association. Dr. Ved Beniwal was elected President on 11.9.1994. The plaintiff challenged the election of the President and Vice President on the ground of fraud, forgery and cheating. According to him, he had, in fact, received the highest number of votes who had been defeated on account of the alleged fraud and cheating etc. According to the plaintiff, elections for Karnal Branch were held at Karnal on 21.8.1994 and all the 99 votes were cast in his favour. However, defendants No. 1 and 2 in connivance with defendant No. 3 prepared a forged ballot paper showing that all the 99 votes had been cast in favour of Dr. Ved Beniwal. Similarly, at Palwal though all the 26 votes were cast in favour of the plaintiff but the same had been rejected at the time of counting of votes as defendant No. 3 managed to interpolate on the ballot paper the figure of 2 against the name of Dr. Ved Beniwal. For the aforesaid averments reliance was placed upon the certificate issued by the Secretary of the Palwal Branch dated 24.9.1994.

(3.) THE lower appellate Court after noticing the factual aspects i.e. as per election result Dr. Ved Beniwal secured 735 votes followed by 628 votes secured by Kamal Gupta and Dr. K.D. Sharma polled 584 votes; again placed reliance upon the certificate given by Dr. R.C. Mittal, President of the Karnal Unit, and affidavit of Dr. S.C. Singal and Dr. Ramesh Aggarwal. Besides it, the Court relied upon the photo -stat copy of ballot paper bearing Code 04 showing that all the 99 votes were secured by Dr. Kamal Gupta. At the instance of the plaintiff, the Court summoned the postal department of the Post Office at Gurgaon and Karnal and so formed an opinion that some mischief had been played during the process of election and so found no ground to interfere in the discretion exercised by the trial Court restraining defendant No. 3 from assuming the office of the President. As regards the election of Vice President of the State Branch pertaining to defendants No. 4 and 5, the lower appellate Court found no justification to restrain them from functioning as Vice President of the State Branch. Accordingly, the impugned order of the trial Court was reversed qua defendant No. 4 and 5.