Case Note & Summary
The case involves an election petition filed by Adam Narsayya Narayan challenging the election of Praniti Shinde (Respondent No.1) from Solapur City Central Assembly Constituency. The respondent filed an application for summary dismissal of the election petition on grounds of non-compliance with mandatory requirements under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The court examined whether the petition complied with Section 81(3) requiring three duly attested copies and Section 83 read with Order 7 Rule 11 CPC regarding the furnishing of official transcripts of CDs. The court found that the copies served were not attested and the transcripts of CDs were not provided, rendering the petition defective. The court held that these defects are fatal and not curable, and accordingly allowed the application and dismissed the election petition summarily.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Summary Dismissal of Election Petition - Sections 81(3), 83, 86(1) Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Non-compliance with mandatory requirements - The petitioner failed to furnish three duly attested copies of the election petition and did not provide official transcripts of the Compact Discs (CDs) relied upon. The court held that these defects are fatal and not curable, warranting summary dismissal under Section 86(1) of the Act. (Paras 1-36)
B) Election Law - Attestation of Copies - Section 81(3) Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Requirement of three attested copies is mandatory - The copies served on the respondent were not attested as required, and the court held that such non-compliance cannot be condoned, leading to dismissal of the petition. (Paras 10-20)
C) Election Law - Transcript of Electronic Evidence - Section 83 Representation of the People Act, 1951 read with Order 7 Rule 11 CPC - Failure to furnish official transcripts of CDs - The petitioner relied on CDs but did not provide transcripts, making the petition incomplete and liable for dismissal. (Paras 21-30)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Election Petition is liable to be summarily dismissed for non-compliance with the mandatory requirements of Section 81(3) and Section 83 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, read with Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Final Decision
The court allowed the application and dismissed the election petition summarily for non-compliance with mandatory requirements under Section 81(3) and Section 83 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Law Points
- Election petition must comply with mandatory requirements of Section 81(3) and Section 83 of the Representation of the People Act
- 1951
- read with Order 7 Rule 11 CPC
- failure to furnish attested copies and official transcripts of CDs results in dismissal.
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (03) 21
APPLICATION LODGING NO.1 OF 2016 IN ELECTION PETITION NO.5 OF 2014
Mr. Satish Maneshinde a/w Mr. Saket Mone, Ms. Snehal Khairnar, Mr. Vishesh Kalra, Mr. Subit Chakrabarti, Mr. Sadanand Shetty, Ms. Anandini Fernandes, Ms. Lakshmi Pamar, Ms. Deepal Thakkar and Ms. Namita Maneshinde i/by Saket Mone for the Applicant/Original Respondent No.1. Mr. Abhishek Pungaliya for the Original Petitioner.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Application for summary dismissal of an election petition challenging the election of a returned candidate.
Remedy Sought
The applicant (original respondent No.1) sought summary dismissal of the election petition on grounds of non-compliance with mandatory requirements.
Filing Reason
The election petition was filed challenging the election of Praniti Shinde from Solapur City Central Assembly Constituency.
Issues
Whether the election petition is liable to be summarily dismissed for non-compliance with Section 81(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 regarding attestation of copies.
Whether the failure to furnish official transcripts of CDs renders the petition liable for dismissal under Section 83 read with Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant argued that three copies of the election petition were not duly attested as required under Section 81(3) of the Act.
The applicant argued that photo copies of court fees stamps were not reflected in the copies served.
The applicant argued that official transcripts of the Compact Discs (CDs) were not furnished to the respondent.
The petitioner contended that the defects were curable and the petition should not be dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi
The requirements of Section 81(3) regarding attestation of copies and Section 83 regarding furnishing of transcripts of electronic evidence are mandatory and non-compliance is fatal to the election petition, warranting summary dismissal under Section 86(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Judgment Excerpts
The Respondent No.1 to the above Election Petition – Praniti Shinde i.e. the returned candidate has filed the instant Application for the following relief : (a) Summarily dismiss the above Election Petition in view of the facts, circumstances and grounds set out in the above application
Three copies of the Election Petition not duly attested;
Official transcript of the Compact Discs (CDs) not furnished to the Respondent No.1
Procedural History
The election petition was filed in 2014. The respondent No.1 filed an application for summary dismissal in 2016. The court heard arguments and reserved judgment on 10th February 2017, pronouncing it on 7th March 2017.
Acts & Sections
- Representation of the People Act, 1951: 81(3), 83, 86(1)
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 7 Rule 11
