MAHADEORAO SUKAJI SHIVANKAR versus RAMARATAN BAPU AND ORS.

Citation: [2004] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 553 · Decided: 13-08-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.C. LAHOTI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

MAHADEORAO SUKAJI SHIVANKAR 
A 
v. 
RAMARATAN BAPU AND ORS. 
AUGUST 13, 2004 
[R.C. LAHOTI, CJ., G.P. MATHUR AND C.K. THAKKER, JJ.] B 
Representation of the People Act, 1951-Section 83(1)-Election of 
returned candidate challenged on ground of corrupt practices-Application 
under Order VII, Rule l 1 (a) for rejectio11 of election petition since material 
facts as to nature of corrupt practices not stated in the petition and also C 
application under Order VJ, Rule l 6-Subsequent application by defeated 
candidate for permission to furnish material particulars of corrupt practices 
but copy not served on the returned candidate-High Court dismissed 
applications filed by returned candidate but allowed defeated candidate's 
application-On appeal, held: Election petition contained all material D 
facts as to the nature of corrupt practice set out by the defeated candidate 
and the defeated candidate filed application to supply particulars in 
support of facts and allegations made in election petition, thus petition not 
liable to be dismissed-However, it is incumbent on the defeated candidate 
to serve copy of the application filed to the returned candidate and the E 
court is to grant time to the returned candidate and pass appropriate 
orders-Furthermore, with regard to certain false and frivolous allegations, 
Enquiry Commission has exonerated returned candidate-Hence, order 
passed by High Court set aside and matter remitted back for decision 
afresh-Code of Civil Procedure, l 908-0rder, VII, Rule l l (a) and Order F 
VJ, Rule 16. 
Appellant and first respondent contested the election and appellant 
was declared elected. Respondent-defeated candidate filed election 
petition for setting aside the election of appellant-returned candidate 
on the ground of corrupt practices adopted by the returned candidate. G 
Appellant filed application under Order VII, Rule ll(a) of CPC for 
rejection of election petition on the ground that material particulars 
of corrupt practice were not disclosed and application under Order VI, 
Rule 16 for striking out certain pleadings from the petition. Respondent 
then filed application for granting permission to furnish material H 
553 
554 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A particulars of 1;orrupt practices as alleged in the petition but copy of 
the application was not served upon the appellant. High Court dismissed 
the applications filed by appellant, however, allowed the ap11lication 
filed by respondent. Hence the present appeals. 
B 
Appellant-returned candidate contended that the 'material facts' 
of corrupt practices which the petitioner alleged had not been stated 
in the election petition, therefore, the appellant filed an application 
under order VII, Rule 1 l(a) for dismissal of the election petition; that 
the copy of application filed by the election petitioner was never served 
C upon the appellant and as such he could not file reply; that tlhe High 
Court ought to have granted the application under Order, VI, Rule 16 
as the averments were false, frivolous, and had been leveled mala fide; 
that in the light of the applications filed by appellant, respond1mt filed 
applications disclosing 'material facts' which were not found in the 
election petition and as such High Court should have dismissed the 
D respondent's application and allowed the applications of the appellant, 
dismissing the election petition. 
E 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1. All material facts have to be set out in an election 
petition. If material facts are not stated in a plaint or a petition, the 
same is liable to be dismissed on that ground alone as the case would be 
covered by Rule ll(a) of Order VII of CPC. The expression 'material 
facts' has neither been defined in the Act nor in the Code. Material facts 
F are those facts upon which the plaintiff's cause of action or defendant's 
defence depends. What Particulars could be said to be material facts 
would depend upon the facts of each case and no rule of universal 
application can be laid down. There is distinction between 'material 
facts' and 'particulars'. Material facts are primary or basic facts which 
must be pleaded by the party in support of the case set up by him either 
G to prove his cause of action or defence. Particulars, on the other hand, 
are details in support of material facts pleaded by the party. They 
amplify, refine and embellish material facts by giving finishing to!lch to 
the basic contours of a pic

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.