( 1. ) THROUGH this Election Petition filed under section 80-A read with section 81 of The Representation of People Act, 1951 (for short the Act)the petitioner a defeated candidate has challenged the election of the returned candidate (first respondent ). In the petition corrupt practices under section 123 (1)of the Act are alleged.

( 2. ) BRIEFLY stated, the petitioner and the first respondent contested the election for Lok Sabha Constituency No. 12, Balaghat held on 5-5-2004. The counting of the votes was held on 13-5-2004. The first respondent was declared elected by the Returning Officer of Balaghat Parliamentary Constituency. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this Election Petition. In the petition the petitioner has alleged corrupt practices mainly basing upon the news published in the News Paper c-Times and jabalpur Express. The allegations about distribution of liquor and money is based upon the information received from the residents of the villages which he stated be examined by the Court. Many other allegations are levelled which are against the Returning Officer and the Police officials. An allegation of bogus voting is also levelled. ( 3. ) ON being noticed the first respondent filed an application LA. No. III (4/2005) under section 86 of the Act read with Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of civil Procedure (for short CPC) praying for dismissal of the petition on the grounds that the petition is lacking material particulars, it does not disclose any cause of action and is not supported by an affidavit in Form 25 prescribed under conduct of Election Rules, 1961 (for short Rules ). It is also stated by the first respondent in the application that the alleged corrupt practice has not been stated as required under section 83 (1) (b) of the Act. According to the first respondent in the absence of disclosure of full particulars of the corrupt practice and cause of action no triable issue exists in the petition, therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed at the threshold.

( 4. ) THE petitioner filed reply to the aforesaid application seeking dismissal of the petition and stated that the petition contains the necessary details as required in a petition alleging corrupt practice. He further stated that from the averments made in the petition the cause of action is also clearly spelled out and as such he prayed for dismissal of the application filed by the first respondents.

( 5. ) HEARD learned counsel for the parties on the aforesaid application LA. III (4/2005) seeking dismissal of the petition.

( 6. ) IN order to decide the preliminary objection raised by the first respondent by way of the aforesaid application it would be appropriate to consider the relevant provisions of the Act on which strong reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the first respondent. The relevant provisions are extracted below. Section 83 of the Act reads thus :

83. Contents of petition.- (1) An election petition - (a) shall contain a concise statement of the material facts on which the petitioner relies; (b) shall set forth full particulars of any corrupt practice that the petitioner alleges including as a full statement as possible of the names of the parties alleged to have committed such corrupt practice and the date and place of the commission of each such practice; and (c) shall be signed by the petitioner and verified in the manner laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1905) for the verification of pleadings : provided that where the petitioner alleges any corrupt practice, the petition shall also be accompanied by an affidavit in the prescribed form in support of the allegation of such corrupt practice and the particulars thereof.

(2) Any schedule or annexure to the petition shall also be signed by the petitioner and verified in the same manner as the petition. Section 100 which deals with grounds for declaring election to be void reads thus :

"100. Grounds for declaring election to be void - (1) Su