IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(Ordinary Original Jurisdiction)

Election Petition No. 4 of 2019

P.MILANY,
S/o. Ponnuram Goundar,

7-5-5/9, Sanjay Gandhi 1st street,

Palani Cheti patti,
Theni Taluk and District -625 531 …Petitioner

-Vs-

1. S.Arumugam,
   S/o.K.Suruli,
   No.7B, Middle Street,
   Seelayampatti Post,
   Theni Taluk,
   Theni District-625515
   And 32 others …Respondents

MEMO FILED BY THE ELECTION PETITIONER

The election petitioner begs to submit as follows:

1. The petitioner states that the notice and election petition with documents issued by this Hon’ble Court on 05.08.2019. And the notice of the Hon’ble High Court along with Election Petition and Documents was received by the Returned Candidate/3rd respondent on 13.08.2019.
2. The Returned Candidate received the Hon’ble Court’s notice on 13.08.2019 and he has taken time from this Hon’ble Court on 29.08.2019, 13.09.2019, 16.10.2019, 13.11.2019 and 04.12.2019 in all dates to file counter on election petition. Despite he was given ample chance of filing counter by this Hon’ble Court about four months time, he intentionally delay in filing counter to avoid trial.
3. Since the election of the returned candidate is under judicial review of holding the office of Loksabha, he has constitutional duty to face the Hon’ble Court without playing delay tactics and he should succeed the case against his election result to continue in holding public office.
4. The Election law under provisions of 86 (6) and 86 (7) of the Representation of People Act 1951 very expressly stress that the Hon’ble Court for the interest of justice trial to be continued day to day basis without adjournments. Further the next provision stipulates the time frame of 6 months for concluding the trial from the date of presenting election petition. Hence the returned candidate has no right of delaying to file his counter and delaying trial of election petition. It is duty of the returned candidate to show his faithfulness to this Hon’ble Court to file counter without further delay and face the trial. Having the suppression of facts in Form 26 which would cause his election void. So, in anyway, he shall not shy away to face proceeding for filing counter and start trial on the above said election petition to comply the above said provisions of RP Act 1951.
5. As on date the 3rd respondent/returned candidate shows his attitude of dodging to file his counter statement against election petition and cause delay of trial. It is unfair on the part of the returned candidate who holds public office for failure of filing counter and delaying trial. This Hon’ble Court may indulge to bring the 3rd respondent under the rule of the law to abide the provisions of Representation of People Act 1951 for the larger interest of about 13 lakhs electors of Theni Parliament Constituency to face trial without delay.

Therefore, it is humbly prayed for the interest of about 2.4 lakhs electors of # 33, Theni Parliamentary Constituency that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass order of restraining the 3rd respondent from holding office temporarily till filing his counter statement in ELP No.4 of 2019 amenable to Sec. 86 (6) and 86 (7) of the Representation of People Act 1951 or impose cost to pay legal aid on the returned candidate for failure of filing counter despite granted ample opportunities and thus render justice.

Dated at Chennai on this the 11th day of December, 2019

Counsel for Election petitioner

HIGH COURT:: MADRAS
(Ordinary Original jurisdiction)

Election Petition No. 4 of 2019

P.MILANY …Petitioner

-Vs-

S.Arumugam
And 32 others …Respondents

MEMO FILED BY THE ELECTION PETITIONER

M/s. V.ARUN [E.No.285/1992]
G.KRISHNARAJA [1287/1990]
R.KUMARAVEL [2767/2007]
T.ARUNKUMAR [2779/2007]

Counsel for petitioner
Mobile No. 94440 31987