Atma Ram filed the present election petition.
The successful candidates were Rattan Anmol Singh, the appellant in Civil Appeal No.
Appeals by Special Leave against the Judgment and Order dated the 24th June, 1953, of the Election Tribunal, Ludhiana, in Election Petition No.
213 A of 1953, for the general seat and Ram Prakash, the appellant in Civil Appeal No.
Rattan Anmol Singh and Ram Prakash appeal here.
The companytest was for two seats in the Pun jab Legislative Assembly.
In each case, the proposer and seconder were illiterate and so placed a thumb mark instead of a signature.
The petitioner put in four papers.
The first respondent is Atma Ram.
The Returning Officer held that without attestation they are invalid and so rejected them.
The Rules require that each numberination paper should be subscribed by a proposer and a seconder.
213B. Naunit Lal for respondents Nos.
The Election Tribunal decided in his favour by a majority of two to one and declared the whole election void.
But these thumb marks were number attested.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
153 of 1952.
213A. Tilak Raj Bhasin and Harbans Singh for respondent No.
He was a candidate for the reserved seat but his numberination was rejected by the Returning Officer at the scrutiny stage and so he was unable to companytest the election.
The companystituency is a double member companystituency, one seat being general and the other reserved for a Scheduled Caste.
213A and 213B of 1953.
3 and 19 in both the appeals.
213 B of 1953 for there served.
213A and the appellant in Civil Appeal No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BOSE J. These are two appeals against the decision of the Election Tribunal at Ludhiana.
May 21.
2 in Civil Appeal No.
K. Daphtary, Solicitor General for India, Harbans Singh Doabia and Rajinder Narain, with him for the appellant in Civil Appeal No.
