an election of a returned candidated can only be
questioned by a person who is enrolled as a voter in
the Municipal election within 10 days after the
declaration of the result of the election. Thus no
one can question the election of a returned candidate
after a period of ten days, which is a limitation
prescribed under section 16(1). On expiry of ten days
from the date of declaration of the result of the
election, a right to call an election in question
ceases to exist in everyone who has not questioned the
election within the said period. In the present case,
admittedly the transposition is sought much after
expiry of period of ten days. The granting of said
relief enables a person to question the election of a
returned candidate by filing an election petition
after a period of ten days, which is contrary to the
mandate of section 16(1) of the Act. It is a settled
position that election law is a statute law and the
statute regulates the filing of the election petition.
The trial court has allowed the application by placing
reliance on order 1 Rule 10 of CPC, which vests the
court with an authority and jurisdiction to add or
transpose parties. The learned counsel for the
petitioner has submitted that CPC has no application
to the poceedings in an election petition under the
BPMC Act whereas the learned counsel for the
respondent submits otherwise. Without going into this
