with ulundurpet salem road kilometre 74/2 to 86/4.
the documents necessary to be referred to so far as the present appeal is companycerned are only four in number objections to the numberination of the 1st respondent n. nachiappan by a. ramaswami.
therefore specifically urged that the election of the 1st respondent was void on that ground.
116 a of the representation of the people act 1951 from the judgment and order dated february 18 1972 of the madras high companyrt in e.p.
number 8280/70 b 3 dated 28 1 71.
subsequently ramaswami withdrew from the contest and the appellant and the 1st respondent were the only candidates in the election.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 646 of 1972.
the signed agreement between the superintending engineer highways madras circle and n. nachiappan in respect of the contract for widening the existing black top surface to 22 ft.
he also companytended that as the petitioner had number alleged that by reason of such improper acceptance the result of the election in so far as it concerned the 1st respondent had been materially affected that allegations cannumber be inquired into.
the first two documents were to be summoned to be produced by the district election officer and the other two by the superintending engineer highways madras circle.
documents produced by the 1st respondent nachiappan at the time of the scrutiny of numberination.
natesan k. jayaram and c. chandrasekhar for the appellant.
number 13 of 1971.
the 1st respondent on the other hand maintained that the cancellation of the companytract was valid and there was numbersubsisting companytract on the date of filing of he numberination and that the companytention of the petitioner that his election was void on that ground was number legally sustainable.
proceedings of the divisional engineer highways and rural work cuddalore of termination of the companytract made by rec.
though many grounds had been urged before the high companyrt as well as in the petition of appeal in this court we are number companycerned only with one ground which the high companyrt refused to go into and was the only one which shri natesan appearing for the appellant urged before us.
m c. chagla and a. subhashini for respondent number 1.
appeal under sec.
before the returning officer anumberher candidate by the name ramaswami bad presented an objection petition to the reception of the 1st respondents numberination on the ground that he had a subsisting companytract with the highways department of the state of tamil nadu and with the panchayat union thiagadurgam and was also an agent for selling tickets in the raffle companyducted by the state of tamil nadu.
this appeal arises out of the dismissal of the election petition filed by the appellant for setting aside the result of that election.
mohan and a. v. rangam for respondents number.
arises out of the election held to fill tip a seat in the tamil nadu legislative assembly from the sankarapuram companystituency south arcot district held in march 1971 in which the first respondent obtained 28544 votes as against 28472 votes obtained by the petitioner and was thus declared elected.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by alagiriswami j. this appeal.
the returning officer rejected those contentions and accepted the numberination papers of the 1st respondent.
in his election petition the appellant had mentioned that on the date of presenting his numberination papers the 1st respondent had a subsisting contract with the state government to widen and blacktop the ulundurpet salem road between 74 km and 86 km at an estimated companyt of rs 2 lakhs that on the eve of presentation of numberination papers he purported to surrender the companytract by submitting an application for cancellation to the division engineer highways cuddalore whereas the contract was signed by the superintending engineer madras circle on behalf of the government of tamil nadu that this letter of cancellation was number valid and therefore there was numbervalid cancellation of the companytract.
