Inherent power to restore election petitions dismissed in default upheld where sufficient cause existed and no statutory bar applied.

An Election Tribunal conducting proceedings as nearly as may be in accordance with the Civil Procedure Code was treated as having inherent powers co-extensive with those of a civil court, unless expressly excluded by the Representation of the People Act. Because the Act did not expressly provide for dismissal in default or for restoration, the Tribunal could still set aside a dismissal where sufficient cause was shown. On the facts, the appearance delay was only five minutes and an explanation had reached the Tribunal before the dismissal order, so restoration was justified. The Tribunal was therefore not functus officio after dismissal, and the challenge to the restoration order failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Election Tribunal had inherent power to restore an election petition dismissed in default for a slight delay in appearance, and whether the tribunal became functus officio after the dismissal.

Analysis: The Tribunal was held to possess inherent powers co-extensive with those of a civil court in matters not expressly excluded by the Representation of the People Act. The Act did not expressly confer a power of dismissal in default, but such power was treated as inherent in a tribunal conducting proceedings as nearly as may be in accordance with the Civil Procedure Code. For the same reason, the absence of an express provision for restoration did not prevent the Tribunal from setting aside the dismissal where sufficient cause was shown. On the facts, the delay was only five minutes, a communication explaining the delay had reached the Tribunal before the dismissal order was made, and the Tribunal acted to do justice by restoring the petition.

Conclusion: The Election Tribunal had jurisdiction to restore the petition, and it did not become functus officio merely because it had dismissed the matter in default. The challenge to the restoration order failed.

Final Conclusion: The petition under Article 226 was rejected because the restoration of the election petition was upheld as a valid exercise of the Tribunal's inherent power.

Ratio Decidendi: A tribunal conducting election proceedings in accordance with the Civil Procedure Code may exercise inherent power to restore a matter dismissed in default where sufficient cause exists, even if the statute does not expressly provide for restoration.

---