# Mansur Ahmad v. Vijay Bahadur & Ors

- **Citation:** (2024) 9 ILRA 403
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2024-09-09
- **Case number:** Matters Under Article 227 No. 9108 of 2024
- **Bench:** Neeraj Tiwari
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/mansur-ahmad-v-vijay-bahadur-ors-54591
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

Civil Law- The Constitution of India, 1950Article
227
-
The
Uttar
Pradesh
Municipalities Act, 1916 - Section 19 & 43-
Question-Whether Section 19 of the Act, 1916
provides for election dispute of members only
and petition relating to the election of President
is not maintainable under the said provision of
law-Answer- The perusal of Section 43(3) of
the Act, 1916 shows that Act and the rules
framed there under in relation to election
including disputes relating to election and
electoral offences of a member shall, mutatis
mutandis, apply in relation to election of the
President, meaning thereby that provision of
Section 19 of the Act, 1916, so far as it pertains
to election dispute shall also be applicable in the
election dispute of President-Section 19, so far
as it relates to election dispute shall also be
applicable for the dispute of election and
electoral offences of President. (Para 9 & 10)

Petition dismissed. (E-15)

## Text

9 All. Mansur Ahmad Vs. Vijay Bahadur & Ors.
403
wishes to appear as a witness, he shall so
appear before any other witness on his
behalf has been examined, unless the
Court, for reasons to be recorded, permits
him to appear as his own witness at a later
stage."
(Emphasis added)

15. In case the petitioner -
plaintiff herself wished to appear as a
witness, she should have appeared
before
her
mother
and power
of
attorney holder. As the plaintiff did not
appear as a witness before her mother
and power of attorney holder, she
cannot be permitted to be examined
now in absence of any special reasons.
It is significant to note that the plaintiff
has not appeared before the trial Court
even once and she has not even signed
the pleadings. Therefore, there appears
to be no special reason to permit the
petitioner to appear as a witness now
when her mother and power of attorney
holder has already been examined.

16. For the foregoing reason, I
find no illegality in the order dated
06.09.2023
passed
by
the
learned
Additional Principal Judge-IV, Family
Court, Lucknow in Case No.440 of
2019 under Section 13 of the Hindu
Marriage Act. As the evidence of the
petitioner's power of attorney holder
has already been recorded, there is no
need to direct the Family Court to
record the plaintiff's evidence through
video conferencing.

17. The petition lacks merits and
the same is dismissed. The parties shall
bear their own costs of the petition.
----------
(2024) 9 ILRA 403
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 09.09.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J.

Matters Under Article 227 No. 9108 of 2024
(Civil)

Mansur Ahmad ...Petitioner
Versus
Vijay Bahadur & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Mansoor Ahmad

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Sri Ten Singh

Civil Law- The Constitution of India, 1950Article
227
-
The
Uttar
Pradesh
Municipalities Act, 1916 - Section 19 & 43-
Question-Whether Section 19 of the Act, 1916
provides for election dispute of members only
and petition relating to the election of President
is not maintainable under the said provision of
law-Answer- The perusal of Section 43(3) of
the Act, 1916 shows that Act and the rules
framed there under in relation to election
including disputes relating to election and
electoral offences of a member shall, mutatis
mutandis, apply in relation to election of the
President, meaning thereby that provision of
Section 19 of the Act, 1916, so far as it pertains
to election dispute shall also be applicable in the
election dispute of President-Section 19, so far
as it relates to election dispute shall also be
applicable for the dispute of election and
electoral offences of President. (Para 9 & 10)

Petition dismissed. (E-15)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari, J.)

1. Heard Sri Mansoor Ahmad, learned
counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.P. Singh,
learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel
and Sri Ten Singh, learned counsel for the
private respondents.
404 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

2. Present petition has been filed with
the following prayer:

"i. to set aside the impugned
order dated 16.07.2024 passed in Case No.
2 of 2023 and remand back the matter to
Ld. Court concerned to pass a fresh and
appropriate order."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that Election Petition no. 2 of
2023 has been filed by respondent No. 1
challenging the election of petitioner as
Chairman/Pesident
of
Nagar
Palika
Parishad,
Chunar,
Mirzapur
under
Section 19 of the U.P. Municipalities
Act, 1916(hereinafter, referred to as, 'Act,
1916'). He next submitted that petitioner
has filed objection dated 10.06.2023 on
the ground that election of President may
not be challenged under Section 19 of the
Act, 1916 as it belongs to election of
members, therefore Election Petition no.
2 of 2023 may be dismissed as not
maintainable. He next submitted that
objection of petitioner has been rejected
vide impugned order dated 16.07.2024.
He further submitted that Section 19 of
the Act, 1916 provides for election
dispute of members only and petition
relating to the election of President is not
maintainable under the said provision of
law, therefore, impugned order dated
16.07.2024 is bad and liable to be set
aside.

4. Sri S.K. Singh, learned Additional
Chief Standing Counsel as well as Sri Ten
Singh, learned counsel for the private
respondents
vehemently
opposed
the
submission of learned counsel for the
petitioner and submitted that Section 43 of
the Act, 1916 itself provides that provisions
for election to the post of a member shall
mutatis mutandis apply to the election for
the post of President, therefore, there is no
illegality in the impugned order dated
16.07.2024.

5. I have considered the rival
submissions made by learned counsel for
the parties and perused provisions of law.

6. Section 19 of the Act, 1916
pertains to power to question the municipal
election by petition. The same is being
quoted hereinbelow:

"19.
Power
to
question
municipal election by petition. - (1) The
election of any person as a member of a
[Municipality] may be questioned by an
election petition on the ground, -

(a) that such person committed
during or in respect of the election
proceedings a corrupt practice as defined
in Section 28;

(b) that such person was declared
to be elected by reason of the improper
rejection or admission of one or more
votes, or any other reason was not duly
elected by a majority of lawful votes;

(c) that such person was not
qualified to be nominated as a candidate
for election or that the nomination paper of
the petitioner was improperly rejected.

(2) The election of any person as
a member of a [Municipality] shall not be
questioned, -

(a) on the ground that the name
of any person qualified to vote has been
omitted from, or the name of any person
not qualified to vote has been inserted in
the electoral roll or rolls;

[(b)] on the ground of any noncompliance with this Act or any rule, or of
any mistake in the forms required thereby,
or of any error, irregularity or informality
on the part of the officer or officers
charged with carrying out this Act or any
9 All. Maan Singh & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
405
rules, unless such non-compliance, mistake,
error, irregularity or informality has
materially affected the result of the
election."

7. From the perusal of the aforesaid
provision, it shows that it is for dispute of
election of members.

8. Section 43 of the Act, 1916
pertains to election of President. Same is
being quoted hereinbelow:

"43. Election of President. - (1)
The President of the municipality shall be
elected on the basis of adult suffrage by the
electors in the municipal area.

(2) An outgoing President shall
be eligible for re-election.

(3) The provision of this Act and
the rules framed thereunder in relation to
election (including disputes relating to
election and electoral offences) of a
member shall, mutatis mutandis, apply in
relation to election of the President.

(4) If in a general election a
person is elected both as member and
President of the municipality or being a
member of the municipality is elected
President thereof in any bye-election, he
shall, except as provided in Section 49,
cease to be a member from the date of his
election as President.] "

9. From the perusal of Section 43(3)
of the Act, 1916, it again shows that Act
and the rules framed thereunder in relation
to election including disputes relating to
election and electoral offences of a member
shall, mutatis mutandis, apply in relation to
election of the President, meaning thereby
that provision of Section 19 of the Act,
1916, so far as it pertains to election
dispute shall also be applicable in the
election dispute of President.

10. Therefore, in light of Section 19
and 43 of the Act, 1916, this Court holds
that provision of Section 19, so far as it
relates to election dispute shall also be
applicable for the dispute of election
and
electoral
offences
of
President.
Therefore, I found no illegality or infirmity
in the impugned order dated 16.07.2024.

11. Petition lacks merit and is hereby
dismissed.

12. No order as to costs.
----------
(2024) 9 ILRA 405
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 13.09.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.

Application U/S 482 No. 651 of 2019

Maan Singh & Ors. ...Applicants
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicants:
Mohammad Zakir, Nanhe Lal Tripathi

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
Anand Kumar Singh, G.A.

Criminal Law - Criminal Procedure Code,
1973 - Section 482 - Indian Procedure
Code, 1860-Section 498 A- Quashing of
Proceedings - Complaint under Sections 498A,
323, 504, 506 IPC, and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition
Act - Marriage of Applicant No. 1 and Opposite
Party No. 2 declared null and void - Applicability
of Section 498A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act -
No demand or agreement for dowry
-
Allegations of harassment and torture vague
and general - Proceedings under Section 498A
IPC, 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, and Sections
323, 504, and 506 IPC not maintainable -
proceedings quashed.