LAWS(MANIP)-2019-1-82

SANASAM BIRA SINGH Vs. NINGTHOUJAM MANGI

Decided On January 22, 2019
Sanasam Bira Singh Appellant
V/S
Ningthoujam Mangi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Serto T. Kom, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/ respondent No. 1 and Shri A. Mohendra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1/ petitioner.

(2.) This is an application filed by applicant/ respondent No.1 under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC read with Sec. 83 and 86 of the Representation of the peoples Act, 1951 praying for dismissal / rejection of the election petition being Election Petition No. 12 of 2017. The ground on which the said election petition has been filed, is that the respondent No.1/ petitioner has failed to state the material facts which would constitute the cause of action for filing the election petition and in other words, the respondent No.1/ petitioner has failed to state the material facts which, if proved, would amount to corrupt practice under Sec. 123 of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1951") committed by the returned candidate or his agent with the consent of the returned candidate.

(3.) A written objection has been filed by the respondent No.1/ petitioner wherein it has been stated that a cause of action is a set of facts sufficient to justify a right to sue for enforcement of a right against another party and in other words, the facts or combination of facts that give a person the right to seek judicial redress or relief against another. In the present case, a cause of action arose on 11/3/2017 when the result of the election was declared. The respondent No.1/ petitioner has categorically pleaded in his election petition regarding the corrupt practices as the applicant/ respondent No.1 received a donation for a sum of Rs.3,00,000.00 ( three lakhs) and Rs.63,500.00 ( sixty thousand and five hundred) by cash on 10/3/17 and on 11/3/2017 which is within the meaning of Sec. 123(6) of the Act, 1951 and that the affidavit filed by the applicant/ respondent No.1, at the time of filing the nomination, is an improper affidavit as the statements made therein are false.