1. By this order I shall decide the following two issues which were treated as preliminary issues:

1) Whether the petition is not maintainable in view of the preliminary objections raised by the respondent? – OPD

2) Whether the nomination of respondent No.1 was not accompanied by the validly sworn affidavit and was, therefore, liable to be rejected? – OPP

Issue No.1

2. The onus of proving this issue was on defendant/respondent. Learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner had not stated the full particulars and material facts in respect of corrupt practices set forth by him in election petition and on this ground the election petition was liable to be dismissed. He relied on Subhash Desai v. Sharad J.Rao and Ors. AIR 1994 SC 2277.

3. During arguments, learned Counsel for the respondent pointed that in the petition in ground „B?, the petitioner has stated that Mr. Ajay Makan threatened the electors of Defence Colony area in a meeting that in case they would not vote for the respondent then the „ganda nalla? would be kept open and they would have to bear the smell and suffer. It is submitted that the petitioner has not given the details as to when this meeti