Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (1) TMI 1708

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ad with Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code. Since the scope of the enquiry at that stage has to be limited only to the pleadings of the plaintiff, neither the written statement nor the averments, if any, filed by the opposite party for rejection under Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code or any other pleadings of the respondents can be considered for that purpose. The election petition is remitted to the High Court to try it on merits expeditiously, and being one filed in the year 2013, preferably within a period of four months - Appeal allowed. - Civil Appeal No. 4080 Of 2014 - - - Dated:- 24-1-2017 - Kurian Joseph And A.M. Khanwilkar, JJ. JUDGMENT Kurian, Chapter III of Part VI of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nstituency of Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly held in 2012 by a margin of 111 votes. He filed an election petition mainly on the grounds under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) of the Act. Of the six issues settled, issues 2 to 5 were treated as preliminary issues, of which, issues 2 and 3 related to cause of action: 2) Whether the election petition is liable to be dismissed in limine for lack of material facts and particulars, as alleged? 3) Whether the election petition is not maintainable for want of any cause of action, as alleged? Appellant is aggrieved since his petition has been dismissed, based on the findings on the preliminary issues that the election petition lacked in material facts as required under Section 83(1)(a) of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ement of issues and determination of suit on issues of law or on issues agreed upon. Order XIV Rule 2 provides for disposal of a suit on a preliminary issue and under sub-Rule (2) of Rule 2, if the court is of opinion that a case or part thereof can be disposed of on an issue of law only, it may try that issue first, in case it relates to jurisdiction of the court or bar to entertaining the suit. After the 1976 amendment, the scope of a preliminary issue under Order XIV Rule 2(2) is limited only to two areas, one is jurisdiction of the court, and the other, bar to the suit as created by any law for the time being in force. The whole purpose of trial on preliminary issue is to save time and money. Though it is not a mini trial, the court can .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ule 11 (a), only the pleadings of the plaintiff-petitioner can be looked into even if it is at the stage of trial of preliminary issues under Order XIV Rule 2(2). But the entire pleadings on both sides can be looked into under Order XIV Rule 2(2) to see whether the court has jurisdiction and whether there is a bar for entertaining the suit. In the present case, the issue relates to an enquiry under Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code, and hence, there is no question of a preliminary issue being tried under Order XIV Rule 2(2) of the Code. The court exercised its jurisdiction only under Section 83(1)(a) of the Act read with Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code. Since the scope of the enquiry at that stage has to be limited only to the pleadings .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion by the court, the mere fact that in the opinion of the Judge the plaintiff may not succeed cannot be a ground for rejection of the plaint. It is not necessary to load this judgment with other judgments dealing with this first principle of Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code. As held by this Court in Virender Nath Gautam v. Satpal Singh and others[(2007) 3 SCC 617], at paragraph-52: 52. The High Court, in our considered opinion, stepped into prohibited area of considering correctness of allegations and evidence in support of averments by entering into the merits of the case which would be permissible only at the stage of trial of the election petition and not at the stage of consideration whether the election petition was maintainab .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates