Shri Desai did exploit the divergence in car registration numbers and the unsatisfactory explanation ,offered by the 1st respondent in that behalf.
3,000/ on February 12, 1972 through P. W. 30, Raghunath Singh, already referred to.
It is companymon ground that he did number enter the sums paid or payable by way of hire charges to P. W. 7 in his account submitted to the Election Commission.
It is dated 22 4 1972.
Appeal from the Judgment and order dated the 6th November 1973 of the Karnataka High Court in Election Petition No.
Pat came the reply Ex.
K. Sen, V. K. Govindrajulu, V. G. Vasanth Kurnar and M. Veerappa, for respondent No.
P. 33.
Again,.
S. Desai, B. K. Ramachandra Rao, S. B. Chandrasekhar and R. B. Datar, for the appellant.
Some holes of perjured evidence somewhere cannot sink the whole case which can safely float on other tested testimony.
8,000/ from Sa.
some of which bears traces of forgery and tricky photography backed by perjury.
Adulteration of evidence perhaps there is, but, after full company 3 95 sideration of the total material we are satisfied with the affirmative finding on issue 9 b given by the High Court.
Sampangi on behalf of the I st respondent Vatal Nagaraj on 24 4 1972, issued a temporary receipt.
the 1st respondents methodology of winning his election petition that he has adduced evidence.
On 25 4 1972 1 wrote to the respondent Vatal Nagaraj, with a companyy to Sa.
Through the reply Ex.
It serves our understanding of the forces at work better if we also remember that there are sizable Tamil and Muslim groups in Bangalore.
1 Dewan Balak Ram, for respondent No.
9,600/ was outstanding as payable to P. W. 7 on April 10, 1972 when the appellant lodged his account of election expenses, as required by statute.
P. 32.
2 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KRISHNA IYER, J. The locale of this election litigation, number at the appellate stage, lies in Bangalore, an industrial city inhabited by a blend of multireligious poly lingual companymunities.
While economic grievances and social backwardness are the basic causes of what, on the surface, shows up as language or parochial chauvinism, the fact remains that the masses are easily inflamed by economic linguistic appeals peppered by provincialism.
It is a melancholy reflection op.
Some of the companyrupt practices alleged are linked up with Tamil presence in the City.
P. 28 and P. Finding a large sum outstanding from Nagaraj by way of car hire, P. W. 7 Swamiriath, a financially weak person, wrote to the treasurer of the Mandali pleading that since the appellant, the President, had owed a substantial amount in companynection with the election where the Mandali had backed him the treasurer Lakshmipathi had better make good the money and adjust with the President later.
The receipt Ex.
One should have expected a legislative aspirant representing a national party, an ex Deputy Minister and barrister, to be cleaner in the Court while charging his opponent with companyrupt practices at the polls.
1,000/ to P. W. 7s Society towards car hire and this sum is stated to have been sent through P. W. 30, Raghunath Singh.
This finding by the trial Court has number been shaken in argument before us.
both the companystituencies, which were companytiguous .
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The popular identification of the candidature of Vatal Nagaraj, the appellant, with this somewhat passionate Organisation is gleaned from the fact that his Chief Election Agent in 38 7 Chickpet, Sampangi P. W. 8, was the Secretary of the Mandali and on his resignation in May or June, 1972 Prabhakara Reddy, the Chief Election Agent of the appellant in Chamarajpet, took over the Secretaryship The appellant was a candidate in.
P. 34 1 refers to the Society Car MYD 8600.
If multi form companyruption companyrodes the electoral process and that is the imputation here the gutter can companye to power to adopt a phrase used in a different companytext by a great writer.
These receipts relate to cars of others taken by P. W. 7 to make up the ten cars agreed to be supplied, his Society itself being only in possession of two cars.
The anxious 1st respondent has made many other charges of companyrupt practice which,havo been repelled by the trial companyrt and we companycur.
The charges made by the 1st respondent to demolish the declaration of the appellant made by the Returning Officer on March 11, 1972 relate to certain malpractices between February 11, 1972 and March 5, 1972.
Sampangi asked me to accept Rs.
P. 34 a , P. 34 b , P. 34 c , P. 34 d , P. 34 c , P. 34 f , P. 34 g P. 34 h are the respective receipts regarding cars Nos.
8,000/ from 1st respondent Vatal Nagaraj in full settlement.
But, when a pathological power scramble is on, the politics of stoop to conquer shows up in forms of unscrupulous opportunism and investment in group hatred and the Chamarajpet companystituency in Bangalore City is alleged to have been injected by this virus by the appellant at about the time the State Assmbly elections in March, 1972 were hold.
MYA 3981, MYD 9030, MYD 7575, MYD 6756, MYA 4044, MYA 4114, MYD 9779 and MYA 3633.
Certain minor weaknesses were also pointed out which, for general companysiderations already indicated, do number need lengthy scrutiny.
The young appellant had personalised himself as the spear head and become the President of the Kannadiga movement and its Chaluvali Kendra Mandali.
Sampangi and sent that letter by post.
P. 30 .
P. 34 in his own words Exs.
So also the spurious Ex.
P. 31 from Sampangi.
Shri Desai feebly suggested that P. W. 6 was number his agent in Chamarajpet but in Chickpet, and P. W. 30 was riot his men at all.
Two major criticisms were levelled against this branch of the case by Shri Desai.
We have the companyroborative evidence of the receipt book kept by P. W. 7 Ex.
But two invalidating imputations have been repelled by the trial Court and we companycur.
The office companyy of that letter is Ex.
1738 of 1973.
The petition sets out the payment, on April 14, 1972 of a sum of Rs.
P. 31 Sa.
Swaminath P. W. 7 pursued his claim by writing for balance payment to the appellant with a companyy to P. W. 8 vide Ex.
P. 26.
P. 34 1 refers to the Society Car MYD 7222 and the receipt Ex.
P. 29 from Lakshmipathi disowning liability from the Mandali.
I went and companylected Rs.
The office companyy of that receipt is Ex.
This wealth of documentary material is companyvincing enough, in the background of the trial Courts remark P. W. 7 Swaminath has stood the test of cross examination well and his answers seemed to be forthright.
