Civil Appeal No.188 of 2019 . 22 were ordered to be held in the constituency. Against such decision, the present appeal has been filed. 4. The fact that certain properties were not disclosed in the nomination papers was not denied. The only defence that was taken was that as these properties have already been transferred in the names of appellant's brothers, therefore, the same were not disclosed in nomination form. It is an admitted position that only in an affidavit it has been disclosed that the properties have been transferred to her brothers. At the time of filing of the nomination papers these properties were admittedly in the name of the appellant and her spouse in the revenue record. With regard to the legal objection that section 76A of Representation of the People Act, 1976 is contrary to the provisions of Article 225 of the Constitution, the same is misconceived. Article 225 of the Constitution clearly provides that no election to a House or Provincial Assembly shall be called in question except by an election petition presented to such tribunal and in such manner as may be determined by Act of Parliament. The Representation of the People Act, 1976 is an Act of the Parliament, which has provided the manner in which election is to be challenged before the Election Tribunal. The scope of challenge, which covers the acts of corrupt and illegal practices committed by or on behalf of the returned candidates in the conduct of the elections, is mentioned in Section 68 of Representation of the People Act, 1976 whereas Section 76A grants suo motu powers to the Election Tribunal to declare election of a returned candidate void on certain grounds which include non-disclosure or incorrect disclosure of assets of the candidate or his spouse or his dependents. Under section 76A such disclosure can come from any source before the Election Tribunal, which in the present case came from respondent No. 1. The procedure adopted by the respondent No.1 and entertained by the Election Tribunal in an election petition being very much within the confines of Article 225 of the Constitution, it cannot be said to be unconstitutional Article 225 clearly provides that the forum to challenge the election to a House or Provincial Assembly is the Election Tribunal and the manner in which such challenge is to be made is to be determined by the Parliament and for the purposes of' the present proceedings, the manner is provided in section 76A of the Representation of the People Act, 1976.” 27. In the case of Khaleefa Muhammad Munawar Butt v. Hafiz Muhammad Jamil Nasir (2008 SCMR 504), this Court refused to interfere in a case where the learned High Court had disqualified a candidate for failure to declare the amount received by him as part payment of the sale consideration of his property in pursuance of an agreement holding that till such time that the sale had been completed he continued to own the property and was under a legal obligation to disclose the same as a part of his assets.