AIR 2011 SUPREME COURT 1127 ::2011 AIR SCW 1061 ::2011 (3) AIR Jhar R 257 ::2011 (2) AIR Kant HCR 213 ::2011 (2) AIR Kar R 213 ::(2011) 1 CLR 559 (SC) ::(2011) 1 WLC(SC)CVL 525 ::(2011) 2 CivilCourtC 1 ::2011 (11) SCC 786 ::(2011) 1 RecCivR 865 ::(2011) 1 Scale 718 ::(2011) 1 CurCC 173 ::2011 (86) ALR SOC 2 (SC) ::(2011) 3 Cal HN 173 ::AIR 2011 SC (Civil) 496 ::(2011) 112 Cut LT 228 ::(2011) 3 AndhLD 90 ::(2011) 100 AllIndCas 210 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Rajasthan)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): P. Sathasivam, B. S. Chauhan , JJ

Representation of The People Act (43 of 1950) , S.86, S.100(d)— Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , O.14 R.1— Trial of election petition - Court cannot allow party to lead evidence which is not in line of pleadings - Petition filed on ground of improper reception of tendered votes - Both parties in election petition as well as in written statement made reference only to 6 tendered votes and not to 10 tendered votes - Elected candidate cannot be permitted to submit evidence or documents relating to 4 tendered votes. The party to the election petition must plead the material fact and substantiate its averment by adducing sufficient evidence. The Court cannot travel beyond the pleadings and the issue cannot be framed unless there are pleadings to raise the controversy on a particular fact or law. It is therefore, not permissible for the Court to allow the party to lead evidence which is not in the @page-SC1128 line of the pleadings. Even if the evidence is led that is just to be ignored as the same cannot be taken into consideration. Where the election petitioner/respondent had claimed that there had been irregularity/illegality in counting of 6 tendered votes only and not 10 tendered votes and the case squarely fell within the ambit of Section 100 (1) (d) (iii) of the Act, 1951 and the election petitioner has further pleaded t....