Monday, December 25, 2023

Written Objection against the interim injunction in Civil Suit

District : South 24 Parganas

In the Court of the Learned 5^th Civil Judge ( Senior Division ) at Alipore, South 24 Parganas.

Title Suit no. 1250 of 2019

{ SL. 279 / 19 }

In the matter of :

Smt. Sima Poddar, wife of Sri Biman Poddar, residing at 1/11, Sanghati Colony, Police Station – Netaji Nagar, Kolkata – 700 092, District – South 24 Parganas.

_________Plaintiff.

- Versus –

Sri Sushil Kumar Das, Son of Late Nakul Chandra Das, residing at 3/95, Sanghati Colony, Police Station – Netaji Nagar, Kolkata – 700 047, District – South 24 – Parganas.

_______Defendant.

Written OBJECTION of the Defendant Sri Sushil Kumar Das against the petition under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure

The Defendants above named states as follows :

The petition under objection is not maintainable either in facts or in its present form.

The Plaintiff has no cause of action for the petition under objection.

That the petition under objection is speculative, harassing, motivated and barred by the Principles of law and hence it is liable to be rejected.

The present petition under objection is barred by the principles of estoppel, waiver, and acquiescence.

That save and except those are admitted herein below all other statements made in the petition under objection are not correct and denied and the applicant is put to strict proof thereof.

Save and except what are the matters of record and what are specifically admitted by the defendants, all other statements and / or allegations made in the said petition under objection, shall be deemed to have been denied by the defendants.

At the outset the Defendant, herein states the following facts for proper & fair adjudication in the instant suit proceedings :

(i) That the Plaintiff Smt. Sima Poddar, entered into an Agreement for Sale, dated 28^th day of April’ 2010, with the defendant Shri Sushil Kumar Das, in respect of one Flat on the Ground Floor ( Back Side ) measuring about 850 ( Eight Hundred Fifty ) Sq. Ft. more or less super built up area consisting of 2 ( Two ) Bed Rooms, 1 ( one ) Living – cum – dinning, 2 ( Two ) Toilets, 1 ( one ) Verandah, 1 ( one ) Kitchen, in Two Storied Building alongwith unpartitioned proportionate share of Land of Municipal Premises No. 54/106, Raipur Road, being Postal Premises No. 3/95, Sanghati Colony, Ward no. 99, Police Station – Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700 047, District – 24 Parganas South, for a Total Consideration money as of Rs. 8,50,000/- ( Rupees Eight Lakhs and Fifty Thousand ) only, which has been registered in Book no. I, CD Volume no. 9, Pages from 2607 to 2638, Being No. 01378 for the year 2010, in the Office of the District Sub Registrar – I, South 24 Parganas, West Bengal.

(ii) That at the execution of the said Agreement for Sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010, the Plaintiff made payment as of Rs. 2,00,000/- ( Rupees Two Lakhs ) only, out of the total Consideration money as of Rs. 8,50,000/- ( Rupees Eight Lakhs and Fifty Thousand ) only, to the defendant, herein, by two numbers of cheques, the details of which has been duly enumerated in the Memo of Consideration of the said Agreement for Sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010.

(iii) That the said Agreement for Sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010, contended the following terms between the parties therein, i.e. the plaintiff and the defendant to perform being contract between them :

(a) At page number 10 – ARTICLE – II – paragraph number – 2 – That the Owner / Vendor shall execute and register Deed of Conveyance in favour of the Purchaser or her nominated person in respect of the said Flat as mentioned in the Second Schedule below alongwith proportionate share of land within a period of 15 ( fifteen ) months from the date of this Agreement.

(b) At page number 11 – paragraph number – 5 – That the Owner / Vendor has almost completed construction of said Straight Two Storied Building and shall complete the balance construction of the said Flat within 6 ( Six ) months from the date of this execution, subject to the Purchaser strictly follow the payment schedule as per progress of construction of the Flat as stipulated between the parties.

(c) At page number 12 – paragraph number – 8 – That if the Purchaser fails to pay the balance amount to the Owner / Vendor, as per Payment Schedule mentioned below in that event the Owner / Vendor will be entitled to cancel this Agreement and sell the said Flat to other Purchaser and to refund the earnest money to the Purchaser after deducting 10% of the earnest money.

(d) At page number 12 – paragraph number – 9 – The refund will be made by the Vendor as soon as the Vendor will re-enter into Agreement for Sale with the other Purchaser in respect of the aforesaid Flat.

(e) At page number 14 – paragraph number – 4 – If the Owner / Vendor fails and / or neglects to complete thew Flat within the stipulated period i.e. by 6 (Six ) months from the date of this Agreement or otherwise to carry out any one or more of the obligations on his part as hereunder provided or otherwise required by law, in spite of full payment made by the Purchaser as per payment schedule which described in the Fifth Schedule hereunder, the Purchaserr will be a liberty to enforce specific performance of agreement by institution of legal proceedings or at her option may sue the owner / vendor for recovery of the earnest money with interest, costs and other reliefs and further the intending purchaser shall be entitled to charge 10% on the advance amount paid by her till then to the owner / vendor.

(f) At page number 15 – ARTICLE – IV – GENERAL – Paragraph number – 1 – Under no circumstances, possession of the Flat shall be given by the Owner / Vendor to the Purchaser until and unless all payments required to be made under this Agreement by the Purchaser shall have been paid in full to the Owner / Vendor unless otherwise agreed by the Owner / Vendor in writing by way of specific agreement to that effect and if the Purchaser observed and performed the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

(g) At page number 21 – FIFTH SCHEDULE ABOVE REFERRED TO ( Payment Schedule ) – Consideration for undivided land attributable to the said Flat in the Ground Floor ( Back Side ) alongwith the costs of construction as described in the Second Schedule hereinabove written is Rs. 8,50,000/- ( Rupees Eight Lakhs and Fifty Thousand ) only, payable in the manner following :

a. On the date of execution of this Agreement : Rs. 2,00,000/-

b. By 15 (Fifteen) months from the date of execution of this Agreement and on the date of registration of the Deed of Sale : Rs. 6,50,000/-

Total : Rs. 8,50,000/-

( Rupees Eight Lakhs and Fifty Thousand ) only.

(iv) The Plaintiff did not comply with the effect of payment schedule and therefore in the effective tenure of the said Agreement for Sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010, the plaintiff did not comply with her payment and therefore the defendant herein assailed to cancel such agreement.

(v) However, some meeting was held at the instigation of the Plaintiff, at the local club in the vicinity, and therefore on such consideration also, the defendant had bear much time and thereafter lastly on 18^th day of June’ 2013, the defendant wrote a letter dated 18-06-2013 to the plaintiff and given Seven days time to perform, but this is the plaintiff herein who willfully did not make any payment so far and thus the said agreement for sale determined as terminated between the parties.

(vi) The defendant on and after expiry of the seven days from the date of receipt of the letter dated 18-06-2013, by the plaintiff herein, determined the termination and or cancellation of the agreement for sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010, between the parties, thus the plaintiff only entitle to get her earnest money back after deduction being a sum of Rs. 1,80,000/- ( Rupees One Lakh and Eighty Thousand ) only.

(vii) The defendant is willing and ready to refund the money as of Rs. 1,80,000/- ( Rupees One Lakh and Eighty Thousand ) only, to the Plaintiff herein in terms of the Agreement for Sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010.

(viii) The said Agreement for Sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010, is not a Contract between the parties on and after expiry of the period as enumerated therein to complied therewith by and between the parties, therein.

(ix) The plaintiff is not entitled to get any relief in terms of the facts as well as in terms of the Law, thereof, before the Learned Court of Law, having jurisdiction.

That without waiving any of the aforesaid Objections and Facts and fully relying thereupon and without prejudice to the same. The Defendants, now deals with the specific paragraphs of the said petition under objection in seriatim as hereunder.

That the petition under objection is not maintainable either in facts or in its present form and the plaintiff has no cause of action for bringing this suit against the defendant as the said petition under objection is speculative, harassing, motivated, concocted and baseless as is barred by the Principles of Law and hence same is liable to be rejected at once.

Save and except the statements made in the said petition under objection which are matter of record, the defendant denies each and every allegations contained in the said petition under objection and calls upon the plaintiff to strict proof of the said allegations.

That with references to the statements made in paragraph nos. 1, 2, and 3, of the petition under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, are the matter of partly record and facts and therefore the defendant re-iterate the paragraph no. 7 of this written objection.

That with references to the statements made in paragraph nos. 1, 2, and 3, of the petition under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, are specifically line by line in toto are disputed and denied, save and except those are the matter of record, the plaintiff is put to the strict proof for the same before the Learned court, the defendant, states that the present suit have no cause of action to bring it adjudication before the Learned court. The defendant re-iterate the paragraph no. 7 of this written objection. The defendant beg to states that the Plaintiff did not comply with the effect of payment schedule and therefore in the effective tenure of the said Agreement for Sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010, the plaintiff did not comply with her payment and therefore the defendant herein assailed to cancel such agreement. However, some meeting was held at the instigation of the Plaintiff, at the local club in the vicinity, and therefore on such consideration also, the defendant had bear much time and thereafter lastly on 18^th day of June’ 2013, the defendant wrote a letter dated 18-06-2013 to the plaintiff and given Seven days time to perform, but this is the plaintiff herein who willfully did not make any payment so far and thus the said agreement for sale determined as terminated between the parties. The defendant on and after expiry of the seven days from the date of receipt of the letter dated 18-06-2013, by the plaintiff herein, determined the termination and or cancellation of the agreement for sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010, between the parties, thus the plaintiff only entitle to get her earnest money back after deduction being a sum of Rs. 1,80,000/- ( Rupees One Lakh and Eighty Thousand ) only. The defendant is willing and ready to refund the money as of Rs. 1,80,000/- ( Rupees One Lakh and Eighty Thousand ) only, to the Plaintiff herein in terms of the Agreement for Sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010. The said Agreement for Sale dated 28^th day of April’ 2010, is not a Contract between the parties on and after expiry of the period as enumerated therein to complied therewith by and between the parties, therein. The plaintiff is not entitled to get any relief in terms of the facts as well as in terms of the Law, thereof, before the Learned Court of Law, having jurisdiction.

13. That with reference to the statements made in paragraph nos. 15 and 16 of the petition under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure , this defendants deny and disputes each and every allegations made therein, save and except what are the matter of records. This defendants repeat and reiterate the statements made in paragraph no. 7, herein above.

14. The defendant, states that the present suit have no cause of action to bring it adjudication before the Learned court.

15. That the defendants state that the plaintiff has not been able to prove any prima facie case in the instant case, particularly in view of the fact that he has suppressed important material facts and his pleadings are false and misleading and he has not come before This Learned Court with a clean hand.

16. That the defendants state that as balance of convenience would lie heavily on the defendants, as the plaintiff has not made out a prima facie case, the balance of convenience does not arise.

17. That the defendants state that the plaintiff has not been able to prove a prima facie case to preserve the subject-matter of the litigation in status quo, until the trial on merits and as such the instant application ought to be rejected with exemplary costs.

18. That the defendant states that the plaintiff is not entitled to the relief as prayed in the present suit.

The petition under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure is vexatious, frivolous, harassing, and is liable to be dismissed with cost.

That the Defendants crave leave to produce the relevant documents as well as the documents relied upon by the defendants, at the time of hearing.

Verification

I, Shri Sushil Kumar Das, being the defendant, herein in the present Suit, made this Written Objection. I am conversant and acquainted with the material facts therein. I verify and Sign this written objection as on ______day of March’ 2020, at the Alipore Judges’ Court premises.

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Sri Sushil Kumar Das, Son of Late Nakul Chandra Das, aged about ______years, by faith Hindu, by Occupation Business, residing at 3/95, Sanghati Colony, Police Station – Netaji Nagar, Kolkata – 700 047, District – South 24 – Parganas.

I, the above deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and says as under :-

1. That I am the defendant, in the above Suit / case, thoroughly conversant with the material facts and circumstances of the present suit and am competent to swear this affidavit.

2. That the statement made in paragraph no. ______to _______, of my written statement, are true to my knowledge and belief, and the rests are my humble submission before the Learned Court.

3. 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 and belief.

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 …………….2020, at Alipore Judges’ Court.

DEPONENT

Identified by me,

Advocate.

Prepared in my Chamber,

Advocate.

Dated :……………………2020.

Place : Alipore Judges’ Court.

N O T A R Y

Written objection on limitation application in a criminal appeal

District : South 24 Parganas

In the Court of the Learned District & Session Judge, at Alipore, South 24 Parganas.

Criminal Appeal no. 198 of 2017

In the matter of :

Shri Indranil Biswas @ Raja, and another,

______Appellants

- Versus –

Smt. Rani Biswas and Others,

______Opposite Parties

Written Objection by the Opposite Parties, on an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act’ 1963, placed by the appellants.

The humble petition on behalf of the above named Opposite Parties, most respectfully;

Sheweth as under :

1. That the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act’ 1963, is not maintainable in its present form, either in terms of the facts or in the terms of the Law, thereof.

2. That the present appeal under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act’ 2005, has been preferred by the appellants respondents, challenging the Order dated 25-08-2015, passed by the Learned 1^st Court of the Judicial Magistrate, at Alipore, South 24 Parganas, in ACM Case no. 2672 of 2014, only on 15-09-2017, on and after expiry of 738 ( Seven Hundred and Thirty Eight Days ) only, and therefore placed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act’ 1963, for condonation of such delay in preferring their appeal, and whereas the same has been gone through by the opposite parties herein and do not found any sufficient cause has ever been shown and day to day delay and the reasons has not been described in the contents and purports of the said application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act’ 1963, and thus liable to be dismissed in terms of the Law.

3. That the Opposite Parties state and submit that the appellants has taken plea that their Learned Advocate mislead them in the order under challenge, before the Learned Court below, at the first and then at the second the appellant no.1, was suffering from Schizophrenia and whereas on such two aspects plea thereof, the appellants seeks to get condonation of delay for 738 ( Seven Hundred and Thirty Eight Days ) only, in preferring their appeal, before the Learned Court, without any sufficient cause and reasons so far, in detail descriptions thereof on day to day basis, and thus the application under objection is liable to dismissed with cost thereof in the interest of administration of justice.

4. That the Opposite Parties state and submit that the parameter to consider the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act’ 1963, is at first as of Sufficient Cause which prevent the appellant in preferring the appeal before the Learned Court within the prescribed period of Thirty days in terms of Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act’ 2005, and such delay must be described on day to day basis, thereof in terms of strict facts, so, far, which absolutely absent on the part of the appellant, and therefore liable to be dismissed, in the interest of administration of justice.

5. That the Opposite Parties state and submit that the xerox copies of the medical treatment papers as annexed in annexure “B” of the application, as appeared are not sufficient to described as sufficient one in considering at the length of period as of 738 ( Seven Hundred and Thirty Eight Days ) only, and those are appeared as of manufactured and suspicious one, and thus in view of such facts, the same cannot be considered and thus the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act’ 1963, is liable to be dismissed inlimnie, in the interest of administration of justice.

6. That the Opposite Parties state and submit that the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act’ 2005, is a Social Legislation, enacted in a view to provide expeditious relief to the women, and whereas the present endavour of the appellants are straight denial and refusal in making payments of monetary relief as directed in order under challenge, and therefore nonpayment of monetary relief to the opposite parties by the appellants are prejudice the rights as decided by the Learned Court below, in terms of the facts, as well as in terms of the Law, thereof, and thus the present application is liable to dismissed inlimnie, at once, in the interest of administration of justice.

7. That the Opposite Parties state and submit that the appellants herein did not make any single payments, as directed for in terms of the order under challenge in the present appeal, to the opposite parties, and whereas the opposite party no.1, herein is the wife of the appellant no.1, who does not have any sources of income and whereas the opposite parties nos. 2, and 3, are the minor female child of the opposite party no.1, and the appellant no.1, as of husband to the opposite party no.1, and the father of the opposite parties no. 2, and 3, refused and neglect to take care of them, and even after having the order and directions of the Learned Court below, refused and disobey the direction and order of the Learned Court below, with deliberate motive, and thereafter come up with unclean hand in preferring the present appeal on an expiry of substantial period of time, i.e. year after year, without any sufficient cause and cogent reasons, thereof and thus the present application is liable to be dismissed inlimnie, and at once, in the interest of administration of justice.

8. That the Opposite Parties state and submit that the appellants are not due diligent in preferring their appeal, and deliberately avoiding due process of Law, as prescribed by the Learned Lower Court below, viz., Order dated 28-05-2015, in ACM Case no. 2672 of 2014, and therefore the present application under objection is liable to be dismissed inlimnnie at once, in the interest of administration of justice.

9. That the Opposite Parties state and submit that the M. Execution Case no. 36 of 2017, arising out of ACM Case no. 2672 of 2014, is pending before the Learned 1^st Court of Judicial Magistrate, at Alipore, South 24 Parganas, as the said Execution proceeding is for the demand of Rs. 4,84,000/- ( Rupees Four Lakhs and Eighty Four Thousand ) only, for the period September’ 2015 to June 2017, and the opposite parties are not in receipt of their entitlement, till date, even after the appellants made their appearances in such execution proceeding, and therefore the present application under objection is liable to be dismissed inlimnnie at once, in the interest of administration of justice.

10. That the Opposite Parties state and submit that the application under objection in its entirety and proprietary, entitled to be dismissed inlimnnie at once, in the terms of the facts as well as in terms of the Law, and more particularly, in the interest of administration of justice.

11. That unless the Learned Court dismissed the application under objection, the opposite parties will highly prejudice and suffer with irreparable loss and injury, thereof.

12. Thant the balance of convenience and in conveniences are in favour of the opposite parties, and the appellants will not prejudice.

13. That this application is made bonafide and in the interest of administration of justice.

It is therefore prayed that your Honour would graciously be pleased to allow this application and to dismissed the application inlimnnie being the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act’ 1963, filed by the appellants, in the interest of administration of justice, and or to pass such other necessary order or orders and or further order or orders, as your Honour may deem, fit, and proper for the end of justice.

And for this act of kindness, the Petitioners, as in duty bound shall ever pray.

Verification

I, Smt. Rani Biswas, Wife of Shri Indranil Biswas, being the opposite party no.1, do hereby verify this petition and states that the statements made in the foregoing paragraphs of this petition are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I Sign this verification on this _______the day of _______________2018, at Alipore Judges’ Court, Kolkata.

Smt. Rani Biswas

Identified by me,

Advocate.

Prepared in my Chamber,

Advocate

Date : _______________2018.

Place : Alipore Judges’ Court.

A F F I D A V I T

I, Smt. Rani Biswas, Wife of Shri Indranil Biswas, aged about ________years, by faith Hindu, by Occupation House Wife, presently compelled to residing at C/o. Suresh Gomes, Village – Sukdevpur, Post Office – Ganipur, Shivrampur Road, Vivekananda Park, Police Station – Maheshtala, Kolkata – 700 141, District – South 24 Parganas, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as follows :

1. That I am the Opposite Party no.1, in the present Criminal appeal, and the Opposite Parties nos. 2, and 3, are my minor female children, whom I am representing as of Natural Gaurdian and being mother of them.

2. That the contents as stated in my objection petition, are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing is concealed therein.

3. That I am an Indian National.

DEPONENT

Identified by me,

Advocate.

Prepared in my Chamber,

Advocate.

Date : _______________2018.

Place : Alipore Judges’ Court.

withdrawal petition in a consumer appeal

Before the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, at Premises being no. 11 A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata-700087.

I.A. no. of 2020

Arising out of

A/775/2019

In the matter of :-

An application for withdrawing of an appeal under Section 27A of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986, being A/775/2019, arising out of the Order dated 21-10-2019, passed by the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Baruipur, South 24 Parganas, in E.A. Case no. 27 of 2015, become anfractuous appeal;

A N D

In the matter of :-

Shri Ram Chandra Shaw, Son of Kapil Shaw, Proprietor of Sarda Construction, of Purba Baidya Para, P.O. & P.S. Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District – South 24 Parganas.

________Appellant

- Versus –

Shri Mukul Roy Chowdhury, Son of Late Sisir Roy Chowdhury, residing at Sonarpur Bazar, Gorkhara, “Hemlata Apartment” Post Office & Police Station – Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District – South 24 Parganas.

________Respondent

To,

The Hon’ble President and his companion Members of the State Commission.

Withdrawal application, of the appellant above named most respectfully Sheweth as under :

1. That Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the Order dated 21^st day of October’ 2019, passed by the Learned Forum, in E.A. Case no. 27 of 2015, the appellant preferred the present appeal before the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal.

2. That on 27^th day of November’ 2019, the Hon’ble State Commission, West Bengal, upon admission hearing passed necessary order and stay all further proceeding in E.A. Case no. 27 of 2015, pending before the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Baruipur, South 24 Parganas.

3. That it is pertinent to states that on 21^st day of November’ 2019, the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Baruipur, South 24 Parganas, passed necessary order in EA/27/2015, and thereby disposed of with full satisfaction.

4. That in view of the facts of the Order no. 48, dated 21-11-2019, passed by the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Baruipur, South 24 Parganas, in EA/27/2015, the present appeal lost its entirety to adjudicate any further in regard to order under challenged.

5. Therefore the appellant seeks to withdraw the present appeal being anfractuous. Copy of printout of order dated 21^st day of November’ 2020, from website, is enclosing herewith, this application.

6. That unless the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal disposed of the present appeal being anfractuous, the appellant herein will prejudice and suffer with irreparable loss and injury, thereof.

7. That the balance of convenience and inconveniences are in favour of the appellant and the Respondent will not prejudice.

8. That this stay application / petition, is made bona-fide and for the interest of justice.

Under the circumstances, the Petitioners, of this instant application / petition, prays before your Lordship, would be graciously pleased to disposed of the present appeal being anfractuous, in the interest of administration of justice, and or to pass such other or further necessary order or orders as your Lordship may deem, fit, and proper, for the end of justice.

And for this act of kindness, your Petitioner, as in duty bound shall ever pray.

Before the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, at Premises being no. 11 A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata-700087.

I.A. no. of 2020

Arising out of

A/775/2019

In the matter of :

Shri Ram Chandra Shaw,

_________Revisionist Versus –

Shri Mukul Roy Chowdhury,

_______ Respondent

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Shri Ram Chandra Shaw, Son of Kapil Shaw, aged about ______years, by faith Hindu, by Occupation Business, residing at Purba Baidya Para, P.O. & P.S. 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 appellant herein in the above appeal, thoroughly conversant with the facts and circumstances of the present case.

2. That the appellant is a Sole Proprietor of M/s. Sarada Construction, having its office at Purba Baidya Para, P.O. & P.S. Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District – South 24 Parganas.

3. That I am competent to swear this affidavit.

4. That the facts contained in my application, 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.

5. That the above statements of my declarations are true to my knowledge and belief.

DEPONENT

Identified by me,

Advocate.

Prepared in my Chamber,

Advocate.

Dated : _______________________ 2020.

Place : Alipore Judges Court, Kolkata.

N O T A R Y