SUMAN DEVI versus MANISHA DEVI AND ORS.

Citation: [2018] 10 S.C.R. 26 · Decided: 21-08-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
26
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 10 S.C.R.
SUMAN DEVI
v.
MANISHA DEVI AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 8337 of 2018)
AUGUST 21, 2018
[DIPAK MISRA, CJI AND DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]
Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994  –  s. 176 – Election
petition – Applicability of Limitation Act, when appeal filed after
the period prescribed under the Act – Held: Election petition must
be filed within a period of 30 days of the date of the declaration of
results – Said period cannot be extended – Provision of s. 14 of the
Limitation Act, 1963 is clearly excluded – Election petition which is
filed after the prescribed period is barred by Limitation and is liable
to be dismissed – On facts, grant of liberty to file a fresh election
petition cannot obviate the bar of limitation – Fresh election petition
filed by the first respondent was beyond the statutory period of 30
days, thus, is dismissed – Limitation Act, 1963 – s. 14.
On facts, first respondent was permitted to withdraw the
election petition challenging the election of the appellant-returned
candidate, with liberty to institute a fresh petition. Thereafter,
the first respondent filed a second election petition. Appellant
filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of
the election petition on the ground that it was barred by limitation.
First respondent then filed an application u/s. 5 read with Section
14 of the Limitation Act that if the limitation for filing the election
petition had expired, the period spent between the filing of the
earlier petition and its withdrawal may be excluded. Trial Court
allowed the application under Order 7 Rule 11. However, the
District Judge as also the High Court set aside the same. Hence,
the present appeal.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: The Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 is a complete
code for the presentation of election petitions. The statute has
mandated that an election petition must be filed within a period
of 30 days of the date of the declaration of results. This period
 [2018] 10 S.C.R. 26
 26
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
27
cannot be extended. The provision of Section 14 of the Limitation
Act 1963 would clearly stand excluded. The legislature having
made a specific provision, any election petition which fails to
comply with the statute is liable to be dismissed. The High Court
failed to notice both the binding judgments of this Court and its
own precedents on the subject. The first respondent filed an
election petition in the first instance to which there was an
objection to maintainability under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
Confronted with the objection under Order 7 Rule 11, the first
respondent obviated a decision thereon by withdrawing the
election petition. On facts, grant of liberty to file a fresh election
petition cannot obviate the bar of limitation. The fresh election
petition filed by the first respondent was beyond the statutory
period of 30 days and hence is dismissed. The impugned order of
the High Court is set aside. [Paras 9, 10] [33-F-H; 34-A, B]
Joginder Singh v Baldev Singh 2010 (1) PLR 769 ;
Rashpal Singh @ Rachpal Singh v Jasvir Singh
2009 (3) RCR (Civil) 408 ; Chet Ram v State of Punjab
2010 (4) PLR 718 ; Darshan Singh v Karamjit Singh
2012 (2) PLR 831 ; Parkasho v Bhola Devi 2012(3)
PLR 541;
Deepa Mangla v Nanak Chand
CR No 523/2013 decided on 06.02.2015 ; Hukum Dev
Narain Yadav v Lalit Narain Mishra (1974) 2 SCC
133 : [1974] 3 SCR 31 ; Charan Lal Sahu v Nandkishore
Bhatt (1973) 2 SCC 530 : [1974] 1 SCR 294 ;
Lachhman Das Arora v Ganeshi Lal (1999) 8 SCC
532 : [1999] 2 Suppl. SCR 174 – referred to.
Case Law Reference
2009 (3) RCR (Civil) 408      referred to
Para 3
2010 (4) PLR 718
        referred to
Para 3
2012 (2) PLR 831
        referred to
Para 3
2012 (3) PLR 541
        referred to
Para 3
[1974] 3 SCR 31
        referred to
Para 6
[1974] 1 SCR 294
        referred to
Para 7
[1999] 2 Suppl. SCR 174      referred to
Para 8
SUMAN DEVI  v. MANISHA DEVI  AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
28
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 10 S.C.R.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 8337
of 2018.
From the Judgment and Order dated 11.08.2017 of the High Court
of  Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Revision No. 1120 of
2017.
Ms. Kaveeta Wadia, Shashank Tripathi, Shish Pal Later, Johri
Mal, Sonit Sinhmar, Devesh Kumar Tripathi, Advs. for the appearing
parties.
 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 1. The appellant and the first
respondent contested elections for the post of Ward

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