1993 (1) TMI 298 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved:
The applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to a recrimination notice given under Section 97 of the Representation of People Act, 1951.

Summary:

Applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act:
The case involved an election petition where the returned candidate contested the validity of the election of the appellant. The appellant submitted a recrimination notice under Section 97 of the Act beyond the prescribed 14-day period, accompanied by an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay. The question was whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act applied to the filing of the recrimination notice. The court examined the relevant provisions of the Representation of People Act, particularly Section 97, which allows the returned candidate to give evidence to prove the voidness of the election if he had been the candidate. The court emphasized that the Act is a self-contained code, and previous decisions established that the provisions of the Limitation Act do not govern the filing of election petitions or their trial. The court concluded that since a recrimination notice is equated to an election petition under Section 97, the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act do not apply to the filing of the recrimination notice.

Comparison with Previous Decisions:
The court compared the present case with previous decisions, including H.N. Yadav v. L.N. Misra, which clarified that the provisions of the Limitation Act are excluded in proceedings under the Representation of People Act. The court highlighted that the applicability of Section 5 should be judged based on the provisions of the Act itself, and in this case, the Act provided a complete code that did not admit the application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The court also distinguished the applicability of Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act in appeals under the Act from its application in the filing of election petitions.

Conclusion:
Based on the established principles and the self-contained nature of the Representation of People Act, the court dismissed the appeal, stating that the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act do not apply to the filing of election petitions or recrimination notices under the Act.