The appellants companytention is that the order of the Tribunal dismissing the petition had number been made under either of these sections.
183 of 1957, arising out of the judgment and order dated November 8, 1957, of Shri Harbaksh Singh, Member, Election Tribunal, Karnal, in Election Petition No.
Purshottam Tricumdas, J. B. Dadachanji, S. N. Andley and P. Vohra, for the appellant.
The respondent went up in appeal to the High Court of Punjab.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated August 12, 1958, of the Punjab High Court in First Appeal Order No.
85 of 1959.
The High Court held that an appeal lay to it and that the order dismissing the petition was wrong because the terms of s. 117 had been companyplied with.
Section 90 Procedure before the Tribunal.
Decision of the Tribunal.
Ganpat Rai, for respondent No.
The respondent objected to the application being entertained because of the delay in filing it and also on the ground that it companyld number be decided without taking evidence.
The present appeal is against this order of the High Court.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
249 of 1957.
At the companyclusion of the trial of an election petition the Tribunal shall make an order a dismissing the election petition or b declaring the election of all or any of the returned candidates to be void or c declaring the election of all or any of the returned candidates to be void and the petitioner or any other candidate to have been duly elected.
Naunit Lal, for respondent No.
The appellants companytention was that the receipt enclosed with the petition was number, for reasons which will be mentioned later, in terms of the section.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SARKAR, J. ID the 1957 General Elections the appellant was declared elected to the Punjab Legislative Assembly.
When the case was ready for argument, the appellant made an application to the Tribunal for an order dismissing the petition under s. 90 3 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which is later set out, on the ground that s. 117 of that Act had number been companyplied with.
1,000 had been made by the petitioner infavour of the Secretary to the Election Commission as security for the companyts of the petition.
April 1.
The respondent, Gian Chand, filed an election petition for a declaration that the appellants election was void.
