District : South 24 Parganas.
In
the Court of the Learned 2nd Civil Judge ( Junior Division ), at
Baruipur, South 24 Parganas.
Title
Suit no. 261 of 2011.
Smt.
Shantilata Rudra
_______Plaintiff.
-
Versus
–
Shri Dulal Chandra
Naskar & Ors.
____Defendants.
Written
Objection of Defendant no. 1, Shri Dulal Chandra Naskar, against the Petition
under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code,
filed by the Plaintiff.
The Defendant above named
states as follows :
- The
Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, read with Section 151 of C.P.C. is
not maintainable either in facts or in its present form.
- The
Plaintiff has no cause of action for the Suit as well as for such petition.
- That
the Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, read with Section 151 of
C.P.C. is speculative, harassing, motivated and barred by the Principles
of law and hence it is liable to be rejected.
- The
present Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, read with Section 151 of
C.P.C. is barred by the principles of estoppel, waiver, and acquiseence.
- The
Suit as well as Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, read with Section
151 of C.P.C. are result of deep rooted conspiracy and collusion amongst
the persons intended to grab the property and or Land Mafia, who have
wrongfully and illegally conspired and colluded with each other to cause
undue harassment to this defendant on the basis of purported forged
documents, and more particularly the present suit has filed by a
fictitious person as plaintiff to the present suit, as such there is no
existence of the Plaintiff named as Shantilata Rudra, Wife of Netai Rudra,
of Village – Barhansh Fartabad, Police Station – Sonarpur, District –
South 24 Parganas, In fact this
defendant called upon the plaintiff to produce originals of the said
documents as well as to personally appear in person with the proof of her
identity, prior to the date of hearing enabling this defendant to inspect
the original of such purported documents and also to inspect her identity,
and to file additional written statement on disclosure of further details
in that regard and in such circumstances this defendant reserve his right
to amend the written statement or to file additional written statement as
the case may be to that effect at the appropriate time and juncture.
- Save
and except the statements of the Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2,
read with Section 151 of C.P.C. specifically admitted herein, the
defendants denies each and every other statements as alleged in the said
petition and puts the plaintiff to the strict proof thereof.
- That
the defendant, states that the Plaint as well as Petition under Order 39
Rule 1 & 2, read with Section 151 of C.P.C. filed by the fictitious
plaintiff is in gross abuse process of law, without merit and liable to dismiss
with costs, at once.
- At
the outset the Defendant, herein states the following facts for proper
& fair adjudication in the instant suit proceedings :
I.
That the
Defendant purchased ALL THAT THE Land measuring about 31 Cottahas 2 Chhitaks (
more or less ) at Mouza – Tegharia, R.S. and L.R. Dag no. 24, Khatian no. 552,
Police Station Sonarpur, District – South 24 Parganas, for Valuable
consideration through the Deeds (a) Deed no. 05364 for the year 2011,
registered in Book no. I, CD Volume no. 18, Pages from 1713 to 1722, registered
at District Sub Registrar – IV, South 24 Parganas, Alipore District Registry
Office,
II.
That the
defendant Purchased Land measuring about 31 Cottahas 2 Chhitaks ( more or less
) at Mouza – Tegharia, R.S. and L.R. Dag no. 24, Khatian no. 552, Police
Station Sonarpur, District – South 24 Parganas, from the Vendor Sri Eyar Ali
Mullick, whose name has been duly recorded in the record of Rights and finally
published in Revenue Survey Record or PORCHA by the Office of the B.L. &
L.R.O. Sonarpur, South 24 Parganas, and whereas after such purchase by the
Defendant, the defendant, mutated his name and paying taxes to the B.L. &
L.R.O.
III.
That the
Defendant states that Defendant applied for conversion of the said Land from
Shali to Bastu before the Authority of the B.L. & L.R.O. and whereas
subsequently the said conversion of Land of the Defendant’s has been allowed
and the Parcha published clearly shows the said Land is now by nature a “Bastu
Land” in the name of the Defendant and the detailed information on inspection
also shows that the said Land has been converted duly in accordance with the
Law as Bastu, in the name of Defendant.
IV.
That
Defendant states that the Vendor Sri Eyar Ali Mullick, also made a Deed of
Declaration on 21st day of February’ 2012, stating interalia the
Facts of Registration and Transfer through the Deed of Conveyance in favour of
your Petitioner, vide Deed no. 01365 for the year 2012, Registered in Book no.
I, CD Volume no. 5, Pages from 1755 to 1764, registered at District Sub
Registrar – IV, office of the D.S.R. – IV South 24 Parganas,
V.
That the
defendant is an absolute Owner of the property described as Land measuring
about 31 Cottahas 2 Chhitaks ( more or less ) at Mouza – Tegharia, R.S. and
L.R. Dag no. 24, Khatian no. 552, Police Station Sonarpur, District – South 24
Parganas, and whereas the defendant enjoying such property by paying all
necessary Govt. Revenues and others
- That
without waiving any of the aforesaid Objections and Facts and fully
relying thereupon and without prejudice to the same. The Defendant, now deals
with the specific paragraphs of the said Petition under Order 39 Rule 1
& 2, read with Section 151 of C.P.C. in seriatim as hereunder.
- The
statements as alleged in paragraph nos.1 to 8, of the plaint are all
emphatically denied by the defendant as the same are not at all true or
correct and more particularly based upon forged documents and or papers.
The defendant does not admit any thing as those are not the matter of
facts as well as not the matter of true record, whatsoever, the story
enumerated in such fancifully manner to in clinch issues in favour of the
fictitious plaintiff, solely based on the forged and manufactured
documents and or papers. The defendant states that the defendant enquire
about the truth of the statement of the plaintiff as enumerated in
paragraph no. 6 of the plaint, about the Title Suit no. 211 filed in the
year 1960, before the Learned 2nd Civil Judge ( Junior Division
) at Baruipur, South 24 Parganas, with the concerned Judicial Record
Section situated at Alipore Judges’ Court, Alipore, Kolkata, South 24
Parganas, and astonished upon receipt of the certified copy of the entry
recorded in the index of the said concerned judicial record section of the
Alipore Judges’ Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas, as such the said Title Suit
being no. 211 of 1960, was not instituted by this fictitious plaintiff,
and whereas the certified copy shows that the plaintiff in the said Suit
is Bipin Behari Halder and the defendants are as Sarat Chandra Mondal and
4 others, and whereas the said Suit finally decided as on 24-05-1962, as
Defunct with cost. Thus the present suit is a malicious proceeding having
fictitious plaintiff, with false and fabricated / concocted story and more
particularly with the forged documents / papers. The present suit instituted
by some un scripture person by the fictitious plaintiff herein, to harass
the plaintiff in several manners.
- With
regard to the paragraphs nos. 9 and 11, of the Petition under Order 39
Rule 1 & 2, read with Section 151 of C.P.C. are all emphatically
denied by the defendant, in view of the above stated herein.
- The Defendant states and submits that
the said Plaint as well as Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, read
with Section 151 of C.P.C. filed by the Fictitious Plaintiff herein with
baseless, frivolous, concocted and untrue allegation against the
Defendant, and with dubious intention, and thus liable to be rejected with
exemplary costs, at once.
- The
cause of action for the suit has not arisen in the manner as alleged in
the plaint and the plaintiff can not be said to have any cause of action
for the suit. In fact, the suit is bad for multi – feriousness of cause of
action.
- The
Suit as well as Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, read with Section
151 of C.P.C. are vexatious, frivolous, harassing, and liable to be
dismissed with cost.
- That
in the above stated Facts and Circumstances, the Defendant seeks dismissal
of the Plaint as well as Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, read with
Section 151 of C.P.C. with exemplary Costs and others.
Documents Relied Upon by the
Defendant :
(a) Deed no. 05364 for the year 2011,
registered in Book no. I, CD Volume no. 18, Pages from 1713 to 1722, registered
at District Sub Registrar – IV, South 24 Parganas, Alipore District Registry
Office,
(b) Deed no. 05366 for the year 2011,
registered in Book no. I, CD Volume no. 18, Pages from 1733 to 1742, registered
at District Sub Registrar – IV, South 24 Parganas, Alipore District Registry
Office,
(c) Deed no. 05365 for the year 2011, registered
in Book no. I, CD Volume no. 18, Pages from 1723 to 1732, registered at
District Sub Registrar – IV, South 24 Parganas, Alipore District Registry
Office,
(d) Parcha of the B.L. & L.R.O.
and other related papers or documents of B.L.& L.R.O.
(e) Certified Copy of the Title
Suit no. 211 of 1960.
(f) And other related and relevant
documents and or papers.
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sri Dulal Chandra
Naskar, Son of Late Lalit Mohan Naskar, aged about _______ years, by faith
Hindu, by Occupation – Business, residing at Village – Tegharia, Post Office –
Ramkrishna Pally, Police Station – Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District –
South 24 Parganas.
.
I, the above deponent do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare as under :-
1 : That I am the defendant no.1
in the above Suit / case, thoroughly conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the present case and am competent to swear this affidavit.
2 : That the facts contained in
aforesaid Written Objection, the contents of which have not been repeated herein
for the sake of brevity may be read as an integral part of this affidavit and
are true and correct to my knowledge.
DEPONENT
Verification
I, the above named deponent do
hereby solemnly verify that the contents of my above affidavit are true and
correct to my knowledge, and no part of it is false and nothing material has
been concealed therein.
Verified this ………….the day of
…………….2013, at Kolkata.
DEPONENT
Identified
by me,
Advocate.
Prepared in my Chamber,
Advocate.
Dated :……………2013.
Place : Kolkata.
N O T A R Y
No comments:
Post a Comment