SHIV CHAND versus UJAGAR SINGH & ANR.

SHIV CHAND versus UJAGAR SINGH & ANR.

A candidate against whom allegations of corrupt practice are made is a necessary party under s. 82(b), and can be impleaded under s. 86(4) even if initially omitted; the election petition cannot be dismissed for non-joinder if such a candidate applies and is joined as respondent; the High Court's refusal to implead Mal Singh was illegal and based on misinterpretation of the Act.

Parties
Appellant: Shiv Chand; Respondent 1: Ujagar Singh; Respondent 2 / Intervener / Candidate Seeking Impleadment: Mal Singh; Intervener Advocate: Manoi Swarup
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
31 August 1978
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Election Petition for Non Joinder of Party; Remanded for Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Joinder of Necessary Parties, Election Petition Procedures, Representation of the People Act Interpretation
Election Law Civil Procedure Joinder of Necessary Parties Election Petition Procedures Representation of the People Act Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shiv Chand

Appellant

Ujagar Singh

Respondent 1

Mal Singh

Respondent 2 / Intervener / Candidate Seeking Impleadment

Manoi Swarup

Intervener Advocate

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Election Petition for Non Joinder of Party; Remanded for Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an election court can reject an application under s. 86(4) by a duly nominated candidate who has retired from the contest
  2. 2 Whether s. 82(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 requires presence of candidates alleged of corrupt practice as respondents in an election petition
  3. 3 Whether refusal of the court to implead a candidate, against whom corrupt practice is alleged, was legal

Ratio Decidendi

A candidate against whom allegations of corrupt practice are made is a necessary party under s. 82(b), and can be impleaded under s. 86(4) even if initially omitted; the election petition cannot be dismissed for non-joinder if such a candidate applies and is joined as respondent; the High Court's refusal to implead Mal Singh was illegal and based on misinterpretation of the Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Shri Mal Singh to be impleaded as respondent No. 2 to election petition.
  • Finding on Issue No. 2 set aside.