JUDGMENT :

Kh. Nobin Singh, J.

1. Heard Shri A. Bimol, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri S. Sasi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/Respondent No. 1 and Shri S. Biswajit Meitei, learned Advocate appearing for Respondent No. 1/petitioner.

2. This is an application filed by the applicant/Respondent No. 1 under Order VIII Rule 9 read with Section 151 of CPC & Section 87 of Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act 1951") praying for grant of leave to allow him to file a subsequent pleadings/sur-rejoinder in answer to the replication filed by the Respondent No. 1/petitioner. The ground on which the instant application has been filed is that while going through the replication filed by the Respondent No. 1/petitioner, new facts are found to have been mentioned therein and the same are required to be controverted or clarified by him in the form of a subsequent pleadings/sur-rejoinder in answer to the replication of the Respondent No. 1/petitioner and in the event of the permission of leave not being granted, the allegations made in the replication shall cause prejudice to the applicant/Respondent No. 1.

3. An objection has been filed on beha