Sujata V.Manohar, J. - (1.) The appellant and the respondents contested the Lok Sabha Election held in March, 1995 from the 190 Lakhisarai Constituency in the State of Bihar. Respondent No. 1 was declared as the returned candidate. The appellant challenged the election of respondent No. 1 before the Patna High Court by filing an election petition. In this petition he challenged the election under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) of The Representation of the People Act, 1951, alleging that the result of the election had been materially affected by the improper reception of votes and by mixing the votes of the appellant with the votes of other contesting candidates.
(2.) Respondent No. 1 filed a petition before the High Court under Order 7, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code read with Order 6, Rule 16 of the Civil Procedure Code raising a preliminary objection about the maintainability of the election petition. The High Court by its impugned judgment and order dated 13-1-1997 rejected the election petition of the appellant under Section 83(1)(a) of The Representation of the People Act read with Order 7, Rule 11 on the ground that the petition did not disclose a complete cause of action and was, therefore, not maintainable.
(3.) The relevant provisions of Section 83(1) of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 are as follows: "83. Contents of petition:- (1) An election petition- (a) shall contain a concise statement of the material facts on which the petitioner relies; (b) shall set forth full particulars of any corrupt practice that the petitioner alleges, including as full a statement as possible of the names of the parties alleged to have committed such corrupt practice and the date and place of the commission of each such practice; and (c) ********** " ;