Defective pleadings

2017 YLR 810 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 52, 55 (3), 56 & 63Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VI, R.15Defective pleadingsVerificationUn-attested documents

Election petitioner assailed the election of returned candidate on the plea that he made false declaration by concealing his involvement in narcotics case

Trial Court allowed election petition and directed the authorities to conduct fresh election

Plea raised by returned candidate was that Trial Court was not vested with power to rectify omission and cure illegality committed by election petitioner at the time of filing election petition

Validity

Photocopies of annexes attached to election petition neither bore signature of election petitioner nor verification in the election petition in accordance with the mandate of S. 55(3) of Representation of the People Act, 1976

Election petitioner while presenting election petition before Election Commission in terms of S. 53 of Representation of People Act, 1976, had failed to comply with the provision of S.55(3) of Representation of People Act, 1976

Such defect in verification, whether pointed out by contesting party or not, the Election Tribunal alone was bound to ensure compliance of such mandatory provision

Where permission was sought with regard to production of attested copy, during period of limitation prescribed for filing of election petition, it could be taken into consideration according to settled principles relating to amendment in pleadings otherwise such amendment was not allowed particularly in absence of any request for condonation for such delay

In view of the provisions of O. VI, R. 15, C.P.C. read with S. 55(3) of Representation of the People Act, 1976, election petitioner was to sign each and every document annexed by him with his petition on oath or solemn affirmation and was also to state date and place at which it was signed

Such mandatory compliance lacked and election petition was filed for non-compliance of mandatory provision of S. 55(3) of Representation of the People Act, 1976, therefore, it was incompetent and not maintainable

High Court, in exercise of appellate jurisdiction, set aside the judgment passed by Trial Court and restored notification of Election Commission declaring appellant as returned candidate

Appeal was allowed.