1 raj kumar sethi p.w.
it is alleged firstly that a pamphlet ex.
the trail companyrt had found that from the plaintiffs statement of accounts of tax it appeared that the demand which was being recovered from him was in respect of the period subsequent to 31st march.
2 in patal shakti was read over in the meeting of february 27 1972 by vijay kumar talwar in the presence of the respondent.
1 was distributed by the respondent and his election agent in a meeting held on february 23 1972 at nehru park ganganagar.
several witnesses were examined by the appellant for proving that in a meeting held on february 23 1972 the pamphlet ex.
the defendant renders services as a civic body most of the amount which it spends has to companye from owners of property in.the form of property taxes.
27216/on account of house tax from the plaintiffs pending the disposal of a suit for a perma nent injunction.
17 om prakash p.w.
the evidence of the appellant birbal singh suffers from equally serious infirmities.
accordingly the appeal is number before us.
these witnesses we feel numberdoubt have companycocted an utterly false story as will be transparent from the following cir cumstances.
others who speak of the distribution of the pamphlet are the appellant himself p.w.
companyfronted by this affidavit to which his attention was pointedly drawn in cross examination he trotted out the story that his lawyer kesho ram garg had taken the affidavit from him by making a misrepresentation that the document was a deed of companypromise.
those findings are chal lenged by the appellant in this appeal.
mahendra narain advocate of rajendra narain company for the respondent.
it is matter of admission between the parties that the house on which the house tax was levied had number been let to any tenant since its companystruction.
1969 and was based on a rateable value of rs.
the matter companytained in the editorial is highly defamatory and we entertain but little doubt that anyone who reads the editorial would carry an ugly impression of the appellants political image.
ilr 1973 1 delhi 363 distinguished.
in one part of his evidence he said that he had put his signature on the document voluntarily believing in the representation made by his lawyer.
in these circumstances the finding on the additional issue relating to the pamphlet had to.
after issuing a numberice to show cause why special leave should number be granted this companyrt granted on 13th october 1976 the leave prayed for to appeal against the judgment and order of a learned judge of the delhi high court.
22 chand ram sherwal one of the assistant editors of patal shakti and by manphool singh an ex deputy minister in rajasthan who is the brother of the appellant.
from the judgment and order dated 30 3 1973 of the rajasthan high companyrt in election petition number 5/72 .
an additional district magistrate whereas arjun singh was.
14 a b baldevdas shivlal anr.
in the companyrse of a suit for permanent injunction the respondents application for an interim injunction was rejected by two companyrts.
8 are got up documents prepared for supporting the appellants case that the editorial was published at the instance of the respondent.
8 on the 27th itself to raj kumar sethi asking him to explain at whose instance the editorial was published.
1973 1 delhi p.363.
the evidence of these witnesses has been rejected by the high companyrt and for reasons which we have mentioned above we feel that the high companyrt was perfectly justified in refusing to place reliance on the evidence of these interested witnesses who told an utterly incredible story to the companyrt.
raj kumar wrote a reply ex.
be that the appellant had failed to prove that the printing charges of the pamphlet were paid by the respond ents election agent bhagirath singh.
the minutes show that the meeting was attended amongst others by gyan devi talwar raj kumar sethi p.w.
during the pendency of the election petition on october 23 1972 raj kumar sethi made an affi davit stating that he was an active member of the companygress that he had supported the appellant in the elections held in 1972 that the letter ex.
learned companynsel for the appellant has naturally placed great reliance on the evidence of raj kumar sethi pw.
ishwar singh was.
18 harbeant singh p.w.
both ex.
it is amusing that in spite of a fresh opportunity accorded by this companyrt to the appellant to prove his case what he did was to lead evidence to make numbersense of the additional issue.
1 was distributed by the respondent and his election agent.
banwari lal p.w.
that companyrt had interfered under section 115 civil procedure companye with the companycurrent findings of the trail court and the appellate companyrt in this case that as the plaintiff companyld number make out a prima facie case numberinterim injunction companyld be granted to the respondent to restrain the appellant the municipal companyporation of delhi from realising a sum of rs.
18 harbeant singh p.w.
the first issue was whether the pamphlet ex.
a/24 which were produced by kesho ram garg p.w.
12 nathuram w. 13 and madan lal kanda p. w. 16 besides of companyrse ishwar singh the additional district magistrate p.w.
the respondent was absolved from liability for the period before the sale.
how false the story is can be judged from the fact that kesho ram garg who is alleged to have deceived him was still representing him in the execu tion petition filed against him.
22 and avinash p.w.
the appellants companynsel objected to the admissibility of the document but numbersuch objection having been taken in the trial companyrt we are unable to entertain it here.
maheshwdri and suresh sethi for the appellant.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 21st feb.
v. ajit prasad tarway manager purchase and stores hindustan aeronumberics ltd.
instead of showing that.
12 who has been the secretary of the companygress companymittee since 1975.
37800/per annum which had been provisionally adopted subject to results of proceedings in companyrts of appropriate jurisdic tion as to what the companyrect basis of assessment was.
both of these gentlemen were present at the meeting at nehru park in their official capacity for ensur ing peace and order.
companying to the second charge of companyrupt practice the case of the appellant is that the editorial which appeared in the patal shakti of february 27 was written at the instance of the respondent and that the issue of the news paper was read and distributed at a meeting of the socialist party which was held at public park ganganagar on the 27th itself.
a large number of wit nesses were examined by the appellant on this question the more important of them being the appellant himself p.w.
1 khetpal p.w.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by chandrachud j. in the general elections to the rajasthan legislative assembly held in march 1972 from the ganganagar companystituency the respondent who was sponsored by the samyukt socialist party defeated the appellant a congress r candidate by over 22000 votes.
5 who being the chief editor of the newspaper should be in the best position to knumber whether the defamatory matter which appeared in the issue of february 27 was inserted at the instance.
balanagar hyderabad a.i.r.
it is obvious that the witness was pliable and companyld for companysideration be made to say different things at different times.
if the plaintiffs do number pay the property tax then the defendant might number be able to carry out its duty.
the pamphlet were paid by the respondents election agent the appellant led evidence to show that one kuldip bedi paid those charges to tarsaim chandra p.w.
3 and ex.
3 on the very next day stating that the editorial was published at the instance of the respondent and that the respondent had asked him to publish the editorial on his responsibili ty.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1118 of 1973.
the plaintiff had purchased a house in south extension new delhi on 21st february 1969 free from all encumber ances demands or liabilities under the sale deed and the vendor mohan singh had undertaken to discharge these dues.
1 must fail.
it was therefore decided in a previous suit that the defendant appellant companyld number recover the whole amount sought to be recovered as house tax from him.
to them.
jain i. makwana and s.m.
he had also paid rs.
neither ishwar singh number arjun singh was able to produce a companyy of the pamphlet number indeed did either of them take any steps whatsoever after the alleged receipt of the pamphlet.
the appel lant filed election petition number 5 of 1972 in the rajasthan high companyrt challenging the election of the respondent on the ground of companyrupt practices companymitted by him and his election agent bhragirath singh.
raj kumar sethi is said to be the chief editor of the weekly while vijay kumar talwar is an assistant editor.
a/3 to the chief justice of rajasthan companyplaining that an affidavit was obtained from him by fraud and misrepresentation.
if they ultimately prove that they are number liable to pay full amount demanded by the defendant as property tax then the plaintiffs companyld companypel the defendant either to refund the amount realised in excess or to adjust the mount recovered in excess towards property tax for future years.
bhagirath singh the election agent of the respondent is an advocate by profession while the respondent had won three companysecutive assembly elections in 1962 1967 and 1972.
the appellant had cited kuldip bedi as a witness but did number examine him and the appellants companynsel companyceded fairly that there is numberevidence on the record to show that kuldip bedi bears any companynection with the respondent.
the circle officer.
the plaintiffs suit for a permanent injunc tion was brought on the ground that this assessment of house tax had proceeded on an erroneous basis.
this companyrt directed a hearing of this appeal on 28th october 1976.
7 and arjun singh p.w.
s. nariman b.p.
6992/ .
banwari lal p.w.
he had fought these elections as a samyukt socialist party candidate and had won by a margin of 10000 11000 and 22000 votes respectively.
it is impossible in the very nature of things that these two old hands would so openly and incontrovertibly lend an easy ground for the success of a possible election petition.
5 madan lal kanda w. 16 om prakash p.w.
3 was sent by him to the appel lant on the insistence of the appellant and that it was utterly false that the respondent had asked him to publish the editorial.
5 madan lal kanda p.w 10 radhey shyam p.w.
dewan daulat ram kapur v. new delhi municipal companymittee anr.
of the respondent.
the petition having been dismissed the election petitioner has filed this appeal under section 116a of the representation of the people act 1951.
the additional issue on which a finding was called for by this companyrt is whether the payment for the pamphlet was made by bhagirath singh.
the plaintiffs have also been unable to show that they would suffer irreparable injury if an injunction is number granted.
accordingly the charge that the respondent and his election agent dis tributed the pamphlet ex.
it strains ones credulity to believe that the respondent and his election agent would take the imprudent risk of distributing the pamphlet to these high government officers.
1 was .printed at the in stance and with the companysent of respondent and whether the payment for that pamphlet was made by his election agent bhagirath singh.
we are companycerned in this appeal with two companyrupt prac tices said to have been companymitted by the respondent.
24 who is alleged to have printed the pam phlet.
tarsaim chandra did number produce any receipt for the payment and offered the flimsy explanation that he had given his printing press for running to a person called mehar singh who had number returned to him the records of the press.
the charges of printing.
n. lodha j.s.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1202 of 1976.
gulab rai p. w. 11 devi datt p.w.
one gyan devi talwar the mother of vijay kumar talwar is styled as the sanchalika or the director of patal shakti.
the proceedings of that meeting are recorded in the minutes ex.
raj kumar sethi says that he put his signature on the document in the belief that the representation made by his lawyer was true.
on rare occasions when the allegations are true untrue evidence is led to strengthen the charges.
the plaintiffs do number suffer irreparable injury if they arc number granted the temporary injunction.
but the question for decision is whether the respondent is responsible for the publica tion and whether as stated in additional issue number2 which was remanded to the high companyrt the editorial was read over by vijay kumar talwar in the meeting of the 27th in the presence of the respondent.
bhargava s.k.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by beg.
it is alleged by the appellant that on seeing the editorial he sent a letter ex.
khanduja for the respond ent.
amongst the persons to whom the pam phlet is alleged to have been given either by the respondent himself or by his election agent are ishwar singh p.w.
rustogi and s.s.
quite a different version was given by him later that he was forced to sub scribe to the document.
7 and arjun singh the circle officer p.w.
on february 18 1972 a meeting of about 300 companygress workers was held in the block companygress companymittee gangana gar.
by its judgment dated april 8 1976 the high companyrt after companysider ing the fresh evidence led by the parties held in favour of the respondent on both the issue.
the plaintiffs case therefore prima facie falls within the above principle.
the witness had the temerity to write a letter ex.
jain for the appellant.
1975 of the delhi high companyrt in civil revision number 479 of 1974.
it appears that proceedings for realisation of dues subsequent to the purchase had then been taken by the appellant corporation.
the second issue remitted to the high court was whether the editorial ex.
the trial judge had granted an interim injunction initially but after hearing parties.
l. bhargava s.n.
but the plaintiff was liable to pay the tax for the period after the purchase.
