KANHAIYA LAL SAINI Vs. OM PRAKASH SAINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment passed by the Election Tribunal, learned District Judge, Jhunjhunu, in election petition preferred against the petitioner by respondent No.1 - Om Prakash Saini is liable to be set aside as the learned District Judge has, while deciding the issue of limitation as against the election petitioner, proceeded to declare the election of the petitioner as legal holding the election petitioner to be an ineligible. Learned counsel submits that once, the election petition was held to be barred by limitation, there could have been no occasion to proceed further and decide the issue with regard to the ineligibility of the returning candidate, namely, petitioner.

(2.) Notices were issued, but no one has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1 and other respondents except respondent No.12 - Returning Officer.

(3.) Learned counsel has relied upon the judgment in the case of Narne Rama Murthy Versus Ravula Somasundaram & Ors.: (2005) 6 SCC 614 to submit that the question of limitation ought to have been decided at the outset even in the absence of a plea. In the present case, it was not a mixed question of facts and law as the dates were apparent.