Case Note & Summary
The matter before the Bombay High Court arose from two writ petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, challenging orders of the Additional Chief Judge of the Small Causes Court at Mumbai in election petitions concerning the municipal election for Ward No.19, Kandivali (West) held on 1 February 2007. The petitioner in WP 2644/2008, who contested as a Republican Party of India candidate, filed Election Petition No.176/2007 to challenge the election of the returned candidate, respondent No.1, alleging corrupt practices. During pendency, the election petitioner sought to amend the petition to include additional grounds, such as the respondent's name appearing in two electoral rolls, false declarations, and suppression of material facts. The trial judge partly allowed the amendment only in respect of para 13(B), rejecting the rest. Aggrieved, the election petitioner filed WP 2644/2008 challenging the partial rejection, while the returned candidate filed WP 6330/2008 challenging the partial allowing. The learned Single Judge, by order dated 17-11-2009, referred the question of law to a larger bench: 'Whether an election petition under Section 33 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 can be permitted to be amended?' The larger bench heard the parties and reserved judgment on 14 July 2010, pronouncing on 29 July 2010. The court also decided to dispose of both writ petitions finally based on its answer to the reference.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Amendment of Election Petition - Maintainability of Amendment to Election Petition Under Section 33, Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 - Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, Section 33 - The High Court considered whether an election petition under the said Act could be amended; the reference arose from conflicting views on the scope of amendment in election petitions. The Single Judge referred the question to a Larger Bench for determination (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether an election petition under Section 33 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 can be permitted to be amended?
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (07) 37
Writ Petition No. 2644 of 2008 along with Writ Petition No. 6330 of 2008
P.B. Majmudar, R.M. Savant
A.R. Mishra, P.L. Singh, P.N. Patil, S.B. Shete, D.S. Sakhalkar, S.S. Bangera
Shaikh Fateh Mohammed Mohd. Raza and Kamlesh Yadav
Kamlesh Somnath Yadav & Ors. and Mahendra Jeetbahadur Pandey & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
The litigation involves two writ petitions under Article 227 challenging the orders of the Small Causes Court regarding amendment of an election petition filed under Section 33 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888. The core issue referred to the larger bench was whether an election petition under Section 33 could be amended.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner in WP 2644/2008 sought to amend his election petition to add additional grounds of corrupt practices; the trial court only partly allowed. He filed the writ petition seeking direction to allow the full amendment. The returned candidate filed WP 6330/2008 challenging the partial allowance and seeking rejection of the amendment entirely.
Filing Reason
The returning candidate was alleged to have engaged in corrupt practices, and during pendency of the election petition, new material facts came to light which the petitioner wanted to incorporate.
Previous Decisions
The Additional Chief Judge of Small Causes Court, Mumbai, by orders dated 25-02-2008 and 23-06-2008, partly allowed the amendment application (only Para 13(B)) and rejected the rest. The Single Judge of the High Court by order dated 17-11-2009 referred the question of law to the larger bench.
Issues
Whether an election petition under Section 33 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 can be permitted to be amended?
Judgment Excerpts
Whether an election petition under Section 33 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 ... can be permitted to be amended?
Both these petitions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India...
The learned Trial Judge partly allowed the said amendment in connection with Para 13(B) only...
Procedural History
The election for Ward No.19, Kandivali (W) of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai was held on 01-02-2007. The petitioner (WP 2644/2008) contested and lost; he filed Election Petition No.176/2007 before the Small Causes Court, Mumbai, challenging the election of the returned candidate on grounds of corrupt practices. During pendency, he applied to amend the petition to add further grounds, including dual electoral registration and false declarations. The trial judge partly allowed the amendment (only para 13(B)) by order dated 25-02-2008 and rejected the rest. The election petitioner filed WP 2644/2008 challenging the partial rejection. The returned candidate filed WP 6330/2008 challenging the partial allowing. The learned Single Judge (A.S. Oka, J.) by order dated 17-11-2009 referred the question of law to a larger bench, which heard the matter, reserved judgment on 14-07-2010, and pronounced on 29-07-2010.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888: 33
- Constitution of India, 1950: 227
