JUDGMENT
R.L. Anand, J.
1. This order disposes of an application dated 4.12.2000 filed by Harsh Kumar petitioner under Section 151 C.P.C. vide which he has prayed to this Court that he may be allowed to place on record the amended verification of the election petition in view of the objections raised by respondents No. 4 and 5 in the preliminary objection of the written statement.
2. It has been inter-alia pleaded by the petitioner that respondents No. 4 and 5 while filing the written statement have raised the objection that the main election petition has been verified by stating that the contents are partly based on personal information and partly based on information received from the official record. But the petitioner has failed to state the contents that are based on personal information and the contents which are based on information received from the official record. It is further pleaded that the petitioner has also failed to state the official record on the basis of which the statement has been made as the petitioner is not an official and is not entitled to the privity of the official record. In order to meet this technical objection the petitioner has prayed that he may be allowed to file amended verification of the election petition.
3. Notice of the application was given to the respondents. Respondents No. 4 and 5 have contested the application on the ground that the proposed amendment in the verification is against the procedure and law. It is not a curable defect, rather it will go to the root of election petition which deserves to be dismissed.
4. I have heard Mr. H.S. Hooda, the learned senior counsel who appeared on behalf of the petitioner-applicant. Mr. Adarsh Jain and Mrs. K.B. Jain, Advocates who gave contest to this application.
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No. 4 and 5 invite my attention to a judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported as V. Naray-anaswamy v. C.P. Thirunavukkarasu, 2000(2) Supreme Court Cases 294, where it was observed that in case of defect in material facts, the petition has to be rejected at the outset but in case of the defect in material particulars, it can be cured subsequently. This judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for respondents No. 4 and 5 is not applicable. The point for determination is whether the petitioner has the right to amend the verification part of the election petition or not. The answer of this Court is in the affirmative. The consequential point would be whether the proposed amendment is likely to change the cause of action and whether it is likely to cause prejudice to respondents No. 4 and 5 or other respondents ? Again the answer of this Court would be in the negative, because I will presently show that through the proposed amendment the petitioner is not stating anything new. Rather, the proposed amendment is clarificatory in nature with regard to the source of information. In me main election petition following was the verification with regard to paras No. 8, 9, 12, 15, 16 and 18 of the election petition :-
“Verified that the contents of paras No. 1 to 5 of the election petition are true and correct based on the information received from the official record and believed to be true; the contents of paras No. 6 and 7 of the election petition true and correct based on the personal knowledge; the contents of para No. 8 of the election petition are true and correct partly based on personal information and partly based on information received from official record which are believed to be true; the contents of para No. 9 of the election petition are true and correct partly based on personal information and partly based on information received from official record which are believed to be true; contents of para No. 9(i)are correct as per information received from S/Shri Naresh son of Shri Lohre, Gogender Kumar son of Radhay Lal, Mohinder Singh son of Shri Narain, Jagdish son of Ram Narayan, residents of village Banchari, Tehsil Model, Distt. Faridabad which I believe to be true and last part of the para is legal which 1 believe to be true; contents of para No. 9(ii) are correct as per information received from S/Shri Ranbir son of Shri Gaj Raj and Jatender son of Sh. Gobind Singh, residents of village Mitro,, Tehsil Hodel, Distt. Faridabad which I believe to be true and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be true; contents of para No. 9(iii) are correct as per information received from S/Shri Badla Ram son of Shri Tara Chand and Sant Ram son of Shri Giasi Ram, residents of village Siha, Tehsil Hodel, Distt. Faridabad which I believe to be Irue and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be Irue; contents of para No. 9(iv) are correct as per information received from S/Shri Teki son of Shri Ranjeet, Mohinder son of Shri Teji and Jag-bir Singh son of Shri Udham Singh, residents of village Bahin, Tehsil Hodel, Distt. Faridabad which I believe to be true and last part of the para is legal which 1 believe to be true; contents of para No. 9(v) are correct as per information received from S/Shri Radha Raman son of Shri Bijender and Hari Chand son of Shri Ram Singh, residents of village Manpur, Tehsil Hodel, Distt. Faridabad which I believe to be true and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be true; contents of para No. 10 of the election petition are based on information received from official record which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be correct: contents of para No. 11 of the election petition are based on information received from official record which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which 1 believe to be correct; contents of para No. 12 of the election petition are based on information received from official record and partly on personal information which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which 1 believe lo be correct; contents of para No. 13 of the election petition are based on information received from official record which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be correct; contents of para No. 14 of the election petition are based on information received from official record which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be correct; contents of para No. 15 of the election petition are based on information received from official record and partly on personal knowledge which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be correct; contents of para No. 16 of the election petition are based on information received from official record and partly on personal knowledge which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be correct; contents of para No. 17 of the election petition are based on information received from official record which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be correct; contents of para No. 18 of the election petition are based on information received from official record and partly on personal knowledge, which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be correct; contents of paras No. 19, 20 and 21 are legal and formal which are believed to be true. No part of it is false and nothing relevant has, been kept concealed therefrom.” 6. The proposed verification runs as follows :-“Verified that the contents of paras 1 to 5 of the election petition are true and correct based on the information received from the official record and believed to be true; the contents of paras No. 6 and 7 of the election petition are true and correct based on the personal knowledge; the contenis of paras No. 8 and 9 of the election petition are true and correct as per my knowledge; contents of para No. 9(i) are correct as per information received from S/Shri Naresh son of Shri Lohre, Go-gender Kumar son of Radhay Lal, Mohinder Singh son of Shri Narain, Jagdish son of Ram Narayan, residents of village Banchari, Tehsil Hodel, District Faridabad, which I believe to be true and last para of the para is legal which I be-iieve to be true; contents of para No. 9(ii) are correct as per information received from S/Shri Ran-bir son of Shri Gaj Raj and Jatender son of Sh. Gobind Singh, residents of village Mitrol, Tehsil Hodel, District Faridabad which 1 believe to be true and last part of the para is legal, which I believe to be true; contents of para No. 9 (iii) are correct as per information received from S/Shri Badle Ram son of Shri Tara Chand and Sant Ram son of Shri Giasi Ram, residents of village Siha, Tehsil Hodel, district Faridabad which I believe to be true and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be true; contents of para No. 9(iv) are correct as per information received from S/Shri Teki son of Shri Ranjeet, Mohinder son of Shri Teji and Jagbir Singh son of Shri Udham Singh. residents of village Bahin, Tehsl Hodel, district Faridabad which I believe to be true and last part of the para is legal, which I believe to be true; contents of para No. 9(v) are correct as per information received from S/Shri Radha Raman son of Shri Bijender and Hari Chand son of Shri Ram Singh, residents of village Manpur, Tehsil Hodel District Faridabad, which I believe to be true and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be true; contents of para No. 10 of the election petition are based on information received from official record which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal, which I believe to be correct; contents of para No. 11 of the election petition are based on information received from official record, which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be correct; contents of para No. 12 of the election petition are true and correct as per my knowledge except the contents of this para at page No. 27 of the election petition, which are based on information received from the official record and believed to be true; contents of para No. 13 of the election petition are based on information received from official record which are believed to be true and correct and last part of (he para is legal which 1 believe to be correct; contents of para No. 14 of the election petition are based on information received from official record which are believed to be true and correct and last part of the para is legal which I believe to be correct; contents of para No. 15 of the petition are true and correct as per my knowledge; contents of para No. 16 of the election petition are true and correct as per my knowledge; the contents of para No. 16 of the election petition are true and correct as per my knowledge except the contenis of para at page No. 34 and 35 of the petition, which are true and correct as per official information and believed to be true; contents of para No. 17 of the election petition are based on information received from official record, which are believed to be true and correct and last para of the para is legal which I believe to be correct; contents of para No. 18 of the petition are true as per my knowledge and contents of paras No. 19, 20 and 21 are legal and formal which are believed to be true. No part of it is false and nothing relevanl has been kept concealed therefrom.”
7. If a rational comparison of both the verifications is made, it will be clear that through the proposed verification the petitioner is not alleging or propounding a new case. He is simply elaborating the source of his information. The defect which has been pointed out by respondents No. 4 and 5 is sought to be cured through the proposed application under Section 151 C.P.C. No prejudice is likely to be caused to respondents No. 4 and 5 or any other respondents.
8. Resultantly, the application is allowed subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- as costs and the costs shall be shared by respondents No. 4 and 5 only. While allowing this application I have derived support from Avtar Singli v, Harcharan Singlt Brar and others, AIR 1994 Punjab and Haryana 161 and Roniteswar Saikia v. Tonu Konwar and others, AIR 1990 Gaahati 41. The petitioner is directed to place on record the amended election petition with proposed amended verification within 15 days with true copies to the counsel opposite, as required under the law.
Now to come up in the main petition on 19.2.2001. (SIC)
9. Application allowed.