Section 5 Of Limitation Act Does Not Apply To Filing Of Election Petitions Under Municipalities Act, 1916: Allahabad High Court
Upasna Agrawal
30 Dec 2025 3:10 PM IST
The Allahabad High Court has held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to filing of election petitions under the Municipalities Act, 1916 as such election petitions are not suits.
Justice Subhash Vidyarthi held
“Although an election petition filed under Section 20 of the Municipalities Act is not a suit, it is an original proceeding which has to be decided in the manner provided for decision of suits. Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to suits. For this reason also, Section 5 of the Limitation Act would not apply to filing of election petitions under the Municipalities Act, 1916.”
Section 20 of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916 provides that election petition must be filed within 30 days after the day on which the election result is announced. Sub-section 5 of section 20 provides that petition shall be presented to the District Judge exercising jurisdiction in the area in which the municipality, to which the election petition relates, is situated.
Section 22 provides that a petition which does not comply with Section 20 must be rejected and if it is not rejected, then it must be heard by a District Judge.
Section 23 of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916 provides that the procedure prescribed in CPC for suits must be followed in trying election petitions in so far as it is not inconsistent with the Act of 1916.
Respondent filed an application for condonation of delay of 17 days under Section 5 of the Limitation Act along with election petition under the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916. This application was allowed by the Additional District Judge (F.T.C.-I), Ambedkar Nagar. Petitioner challenged this order before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The Court held that
“While deciding an election petition, the District Judge has all the powers of a Civil Court. Section 23 of the Municipalities Act provides that while deciding an election petition the District Judge shall follow the procedure provided in the Civil Procedure Code in regard to suits, so far as it is not inconsistent with the Mnicipalities Act or any rule and so far as it can be made applicable, be followed in the hearing of election petitions. There is no reason justifying to hold that while deciding an election petition, the District Judge does not act as a Court and it acts as a tribunal or a persona designata.”
Regarding application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the Court observed that proviso to Section 23 of the Municipalities Act provides that sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Limitation Act shall apply for determining limitation of an election petition.
“the proviso appended to Section 23 (2) of the Municipalities Act provides that the provision contained in Section 12 (2) of the Limitation Act would apply to the election petitions filed under this Act. When the legislature has specifically provided for application of a particular provision of the Limitation Act and has not made the other provisions applicable to it, Section 5 of the Limitation Act would not apply to the election petitions filed under the Municipalities Act.”
The relied on the decision of the Apex Court in Suman Devi v. Manisha Devi which was followed by the Allahabad High Court in Maneka Sanjay Gandhi v. Rambhual Nishad, to hold that Section 5 of the Limitation Act would not apply to the election petitions filed under the Representation of the People Act and since the provisions of Representation of the People Act are similar to U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916, Section 5 would not apply to election petitions filed under the later.
Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed and the election petition before the Additional District Judge (F.T.C.-I), Ambedkar Nagar was dismissed.
Case Title: Omkar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Urban Deve. Lko and 3 others [WRIT - C No. - 11631 of 2025]