(1) THE court dismissed the election petition on the ground that Form 25-C furnished by the petitioner was not verified by a Notary. The basis of the judgment appears to be an observation made in the judgment of this Court in the case of Shirpa (Dr) v. Shanti Lal Khoiwal. It was a judgment delivered by a bench of three Judges of this court. Mr Justice Ramaswamy, (at AIR p. 1694 of the report) observed:

"IN Purushottam v. Returning Officer, the present question had directly arisen. In that case the copy contained omission of vital nature, viz., the attestation by the prescribed authority. The High court had held that the concept of substantial compliance cannot be extended to overlook serious or vital mistakes which shed the character of a true copy so that the copy furnished to the returned candidate cannot be said to be a true copy. We approve of the above view. Verification by a Notary or any other prescribed authority is a vital act which assures that the election petitioner had affirmed before the Notary etc. that the statement containing imputation or corrupt practices was duly and solemnly verified to be correct statement to the best of his knowledge or informatio