Thangjam Arunkumar vs Yumkham Erabot Singh & Ors.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

23 August 2023

Case No.

Civil Appeal Nos. 4179-4180 of 2023

Result

Dismissed

Bench

D.Y. Chandrachud, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Citation

[2023] 11 S.C.R. 392 : 2023 INSC 762

Issue for consideration

Election petition if liable to be dismissed by allowing the Or.7, r.11 application for non-compliance of s.83(1)(c), Representation of People Act, 1951.

Headnote

Representation of People Act, 1951 – s.83(1)(c) – Compliance, if mandatory:

Held: The requirement to file an affidavit under the proviso to s.83(1)

(c) is not mandatory – It is sufficient if there is substantial compliance – As the defect is curable, an opportunity may be granted to file the necessary affidavit – In the instant case, the election petition contained an affidavit and also a verification – In this very affidavit, the election petitioner had sworn on oath that the paragraphs where he raised allegations of corrupt practice are true to the best of his knowledge – Though there was no separate and an independent affidavit with respect to the allegations of corrupt practice, there was substantial compliance of the requirements u/s. 83(1)(c) – No case made out by the appellant-returned candidate for interfering with the judgment of the High Court. [Paras 14, 15 and 17] LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES

T.M. Jacob v. C. Poulose (1999) 4 SCC 274 : [1999] 2 SCR 659 – followed.

G.M. Siddeshwar v. Prasanna Kumar (2013) 4 SCC 776 : [2013] 4 SCR 1107; A. Manju v. Prajwal Revanna (2022) 3 SCC 269 – relied on. & ORS.

Ch. Subbarao v. Member, Election Tribunal, Hyderabad & Ors. AIR 1964 SC 1027 : [1964] SCR 213; Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh v. Mairembam Prithviraj @ Prithibiraj Singh 2016 SCC OnLine Mani 30; Mairembam Prithviraj @ Prithviraj Singh v. Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh (2017) 2 SCC 487 : [2016] 9 SCR 687; Lok Prahari through its General Secretary v. Union of India & Ors. (2018) 4 SCC 699 : [2018] 2 SCR 892; P.A. Mohammed Riyas v. M.K. Raghavan (2012) 5 SCC 511 : [2012] 4 SCR

56 – referred to.

OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED

ORDER AND APPEARANCES

JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J. 1. This appeal arises out of the decision of the High Court of Manipur1 dated 11.04.2023, whereby the returned candidate’s application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19082, to dismiss the election petition filed by the unsuccessful candidate on the ground that it lacks Hereinafter “the High Court”. Hereinafter, “the CPC”. material particulars and is in violation of mandatory requirements of law was rejected by the High Court. The returned candidate is the Appellant before us. Facts: 2.

View Subscription Plans →