On December 27, 1957, respondent I preferred an appeal in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur against the said order Appeal No.
141 of 1957 .
Thereupon the appellant applied for, and obtained, special leave to appeal from this.
141 of 1957, arising out of the judgment and order dated December 5, 1957, of the Election Tribunal, Jabalpur, in Election Petition Case No.
Of the three candidates who had stood for election, the appellant secured 9308 votes, respondent 1, 8019 votes and the third candidate, respondent 2, 3210 votes.
97 one D i s t t., Jabalpur, only.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated March 8, 1958, of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in First Appeal No.
The polling for the election in question was taken on March 9, 1957, and the result was declared on March 12, 1957.
By its order passed on December 5, 1957, the Election Tribunal held that the provisions of s. 117 were mandatory and that they had number been companyplied with by respondent 1.
A. P. Shiv Prasad Security deposits for Rs.
Election Petition of Thous Bargi Assembly Con and and stituency No.
On October 12, 1957, the appellant filed before the Election Tribunal, an objection under s. 90, sub s. 3 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 hereinafter called the Act , alleging that respondent 1 had number companyplied with the provisions of s. 117 of the Act in regard to the making of the deposit of the security for companyts and praying that his election petition should be dismissed on that account under s. 90, sub s. 3 of the Act.
Respondent I disputed these allegations and urged that there was numberjustification for dismissing his petition under s. 90, sub s. 3 of the Act.
The petition filed by respondent I was entrusted to the Election Tribunal, Jabalpur, for trial.
320 of 1957 before the Election Commission, New Delhi, in which he prayed that the appellants election to the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly from Bargi companystituency should be declared to be void and that it should be further declared that he had himself been duly elected from the said companystituency.
343 of 1958.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
April 9.
That is how this appeal has companye to this Court.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GAJENDRAGADIKAR, J. This appeal by special leave arises out of an election petition filed by respondent I No.
Rama Reddy and R., Mahalingier, for respondent No.
I of 1957.
C. Mathur, for the appellant.
ID the result the application filed by the appellant was allowed, his objection was upheld and the election petition presented by respondent I was dismissed under s. 90, sub s. 3 of the Act.
On February 22, 1958, the appellant applied to the High Court for a certificate of fitness but his application was dismissed.
Court on April 14, 1958.
Madhya Pr ad es h. Refundable by order of the Election Commission of India, New Delhi.
This objection was overruled and the merits of the appeal were companysidered by the High Court.
