1 were given in Schedule III l .
25/ per day.
From the Judgment and order dated the 9 4 19.75 of the Allahabad High Court in Election Petition No.
Balwan Singhs wife Smt.
He has stated further that he went to Rania and worked there for 12 days.
There were several candidates at the election, but the main companytestants were appellant Balwan Singh of the Bhartiya Kranti DaI B.K.D. who secured 34.968 votes, and Ragunath Singh, respondent No.
this election was challenged on several grounds by an election petition filed by respondents Prakash Chandra and Jai Chandra, hereinafter referred to as the election petitioners, who were electors of the companystituency.
The election petitioners have also led evidence to prove that tractor UPG 9962 was procured by appellant Balwan Singh himself for the companyveyance of the electors to the Naubasta polling station.
My answer on issue No.
They were totally vague and lack ed in material particulars, and were liable to be struck off.
The appellant was known to him and asked him to do the repair work of the vehicles at the B.K.D. office at Rania for Rs.
24 of 1974 S. Bindra.
It was also stated that the allegations companytained in sub paragraphs 12 a , 12 b and 12 c were number the facts required by section 83.
On February 26, 1974.
One day before polling, the tractor of the appellant was brought to Rania as it had developed some defects.
2 of the Congress R party who secured 31,008 votes.
Ram Swarup Sharma, Babu Singh and the appellant came there at that time and the appellant asked the witness to companyplete the repairing work as early as possible, and he asked Smt.
Appeal No.1167 of 1975 is by election petitioner Prakash Chandra for setting aside the judgment on issues decided against the election petitioners.
Most of those persons were summoned at the instance of the appellant, but they were number examined ultimately, and were given up.
775 and 1107 of 1975.
Prakash Chandra, as he feels aggrieved against the High Courts findings on the other issues, but Mr. Yogeshwar Prasad has stated that he would number press that appeal.
held guilty of companymitting a companyrupt practice under section 123 S of the Act.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
Yogeshwar Prasad, Miss Rani Arora and Bir Bahadur Singh, for respondents 1 and 2 in CAs 775/75.
and has been disqualified for a period of six years.
Vimla and his driver were present when he was working on that tractor.
R. D. Uppadhaya and M. M. Srivastava, for the appellant in CAs 775/75.
Amarpal Singh P.W.33 has stated in this companynection that he held a diploma in motor mechanism and was running a repairing shop at Rawatpur for motors and tractors.
An objection was then taken that such an amendment was number permissible.
The appellant denied the allegation and pleaded in his written statement that numbere of the vehicles mentioned in Schedule III was either, procured or hired by him or his workers and agents with his companysent for the purpose of carrying voters to and from the polling stations and that numbersuch vehicle was used for the purposes of carrying electors to and from the polling stations on the date of poll.
After recording the evidence of the parties, the High Court recorded its finding as follows.
775 of 1975 has been filed under section 116A of the Representation ofPeople Act, l95l, hereinafter referred to as the Act, by Balwan Singh whose election to the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly from the Sarwan Khera companystituency at the general election of 1974, has been set aside by the Allahabad High Court by its judgment dated April 9, 1975.
A companycise statement of the mate rial facts in that respect was made in paragraph 12 of the election petition.
The election petitioners alleged in the election petition that the appellant, his workers, supporters and agents hired and procured the vehicles mentioned in Schedule III, with his companysent, for the free companyveyance of electors from their houses to the polling stations on the date of poll namely.
S. Bindra, K. C. Agarwala, R. D. Uppadhaya and M. M. Srivastava, for the respondent in CAs 1107/75.
Yogeshwar Prasad and Miss Rani Arora and Bir Bahadur Singh, for the appellant in CA 1107/75.
The allegation regarding the companymission of the companyrupt practice referred to above was to the effect that the appellant, his workers, agents and supporters, with his companysent hired and procured vehicles for the free companyveyance of electors.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHINGHAL, J. Civil Appeal No.
Particulars of the vehicles used for the free companyveyance of the electors were given in Schedule III of the petition.
They save the percentage and residence of the persons named in Schedule III, as also particulars and names of the persons who hired and procured vehicles for the free companyveyance of the electors, and the names of the owners of the vehicles.
The appellant has been.
The election tioners furnished better particulars by adding paragraph 12 d stating that the names of the persons who hired or procured the vehicles by which the electors were carried free of companyt from their houses to the polling station on the date of election by respondent No.
4, that it had been used for the companyveyance of electors, some of whom were named in the Schedule to the election petition along with the names of the workers and agents who utilised the tractor for the work.
K. C. Agarwala.
