IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH; LD. DISTRICT JUDGE; (COMMERCIAL COURT-06); DIST. CENTRAL,

TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI.

CS (COMM.) NO. 2472 OF 2022.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                          : PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                                  : DEFENDANT

N.D.O.H.: xx.xx.xxxx

WRITTEN STATEMENT FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT TO THE COMMERCIAL SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS. xxxxxx/- ALONGWITH PENDETLITE AND FUTURE INTEREST.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -

PRELIMINARY SUBMISSIONS AND OBJECTIONS: -

1.            That the captioned Suit has been filed by the Plaintiff herein, verified by an affidavit of one Mr. xxxxx, purportedly claiming to be the General Manager of the Plaintiff Company herein and having gone through the entire copy of the suit and understanding the purport and contents thereof, the Defendant is filing their reply to the same. In reply to the Plaint, the defendant vehemently deny each and every statement, averment and submissions made therein, as the same are false, frivolous and misconceived and totally baseless. Before making para-wise reply to the present Plaint, the Defendant seeks to set out Preliminary Objections and Submissions herein below, which are being urged independent of and without prejudice to the other. The instant Reply on behalf of the Defendant is being the Sole Proprietor of M/s xxxxxx xxxx.

2.            That at the outset it is submitted that the present suit is not maintainable as there is no cause of action against the Defendant that has been made out by the Plaintiff. On the contrary, the fact remains the suit of the Plaintiff contains bundle of lies, untenable in the eyes of law and the plaint is liable to be rejected as provided under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

3.            That it is categorically stated that the Plaintiff are guilty of misrepresentation and non-disclosure of material facts. It is categorically stated that, in the present case, the Plaintiff have not come with clean hands and have suppressed material facts from this Hon’ble Court.It has been held in S.P Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath, (1994)1 SCC  1.

4.            That the suit of the Plaintiff is not maintainable in as much as the fact remains that the claim put forth by the Plaintiff seeking relief for Recovery of an Alleged Amount is without any legal, binding and subsisting cause of action. Since the plaintiff is not entitled to any equitable relief from this Hon'ble Court and is guilty of their own conduct whereby the Plaintiff has suppressed the material facts from this Hon'ble Court and thus there is no swing of equity which can be claimed by the Plaintiff as a matter of right or otherwise.

5.            Hence, failing to disclose material facts, the Plaintiff has made themselves liable to have this suit rejected at the very inception so as to avoid the procedure of litigation. Further, the present suit as framed and filed is a gross abuse and misuse of process of law and legal machinery and has been filed with the sole intention to harass the Defendant. Hence the suit is liable to be dismissed with costs.

6.            The captioned proceedings instituted by the Plaintiff projects and frescoes a scenario which is not only disturbing but also has the potentiality to create a stir compelling one to ponder in a perturbed state how some unprincipled and deviant people can ingeniously and innovatively design in a nonchalant manner to knock at the doors of the courts, as if, it is a laboratory where multifarious experiments can take place and such skillful persons can adroitly abuse the process of the courts at their own will and desire by painting a canvas of agony by assiduous assertions made in the pleadings though the real intention to harass the opposite party, without any remote remorse, with the inventive design primarily to harass the said Defendant.

7.            That without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Defendant, further without admitting any of the allegations leveled by the Plaintiff against the Defendant; it is submitted that the documents filed by the Plaintiff along with the suit cannot be taken on the record as same are not pleaded properly in the suit and the documents on which reliance has been placed by the Plaintiff cannot be read as a part of the pleading as same has not been found mentioned in the contents of the suit. It further pertinent to mention here that Plaintiff has relied on fabricated and false documents, which failed to show any direct nexus between the averments, made in the suit and the grievances portrayed by the Plaintiff.

8.            That the Plaintiff herein has filed this Suit on mere presumption and conjectures and merely to falsely harass the Answering Defendant while abusing the process of law and with an ulterior motive.

9.            The Defendant submits that the Plaintiff has failed to come before this Hon’ble Court with clean hands and has deliberately misrepresented facts and indulged into unethical practices in order to file this Suit before this Hon’ble Court. The suit is not maintainable and is liable to be rejected, at its threshold, as the plaintiff is guilty of suppression of material facts.

10.        That considering the above mentioned objection the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dismiss the present Suit with exemplary costs, as the same has been filed with unclean hands, suppression of facts and propagating falsehood, and has been filed by the Plaintiff with malafide intentions and ulterior motives.

11.        In the case of Jay Engineering Works ltd. vs. Ramesh Aggarwal, 135 (2006) DLT 666: 2007(1) R.A.J. 188, this Court has also held that where the defendant is not residing or carrying on its business within the jurisdiction of this Court, this Court cannot be said to have any territorial jurisdiction under Section 20 of the CPC for entertaining any suit

12.        In addition to the same, it has been put forth by the Defendant that the Plaintiff has not even annexed any certificate or bank stamp over the statements of Account as maintained by the Plaintiff and as such the same are forged and fabricated documents as no documents to prove the authencity of the documents as filed by the Plaintiff has put forth on record.

REPLY ON MERITS:

Without prejudice to the foregoing and without in any manner admitting any of the submissions, contentions and allegations made in the suit and except those expressly admitted, the answering defendant is tendering their para-wise reply to the suit as under:

1.            That the contents of para 1 of the plaint are denied and the authorized representative of the Plaintiff company is not competent to file and sign the present suit. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

2.            That the contents of para 2 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that the Plaintiff company supplied the knitted hosiery fabrics items through various invoices according to the satisfaction of the Defendant and the Defendant firm have a liability of Rs.xxxxxxxx/- towards the material purchased as per the statement of account of the Plaintiff company. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

3.            That the contents of para 3 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that against the aforesaid liability the Defendant on behalf of the firm signed and issued seven cheques total amounting to Rs.xxxxxxx/- in favour of the Plaintiff company, to discharge the liability. That the cheques issued to the Plaintiff company were not against legally enforceable debt and the same have been given only for security purpose. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

4.            That the contents of para 4 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that the Defendant at the time of hand over the cheques to the Plaintiff company gave full assurance that the said cheques will be honoured positively on its presentation. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

5.            That the contents of para 5 of the plaint are wrong and denied. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

6.            That the contents of para 6 of the plaint are denied to the extent that the Plaintiff is sent the legal notice u/s 138 NI Act to the Defendant. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

7.            That the contents of para 7 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that the Plaintiff is sent the legal notice for recovery / demanding of payment on xx.xx.xxxx against the said liability that notice was refused by the Defendant. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

8.            That the contents of para 8 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that the Plaintiff sends the goods to the Defendant firm through various invoices and Defendant company received the good properly. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

9.            That the contents of para 9 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that as per the Plaintiff’s ledger account books the Defendant firm has liability as on date of Rs.xx,xx,xxx/-. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

10.        That the contents of para 10 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that in the month of xx, xxxx the Defendant also confirmed the ledger account and admitted the liability over the telephone to Mr. Ravi Joshi General Manager of the Plaintiff company. It is further denied that despite confirming the ledger account and admitted the liability, the Defendant did not make any payment to the Plaintiff company. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

11.        That the contents of para 11 of the plaint are want of knowledge and hence, denied. It is denied that Defendant intentionally and deliberately didn’t appear in the proceedings of pre-institution of mediation and settlement. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

12.        That the contents of para 12 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that the cause of action filing the present suit firstly arose on xx.xx.xxxx when the Defendant approached the Plaintiff firm for purchasing the knitted hosiery fabrics items through purchase order and Plaintiff supplied the same through various invoices to the Defendant firm and total liability at present against the Defendant is Rs.xxxxxxxxxxx/-. It is further denied that cause of action further arose when the Defendant made the last payment to the Plaintiff on xx.xx.xxxx and Defendant issued the seven cheques of different dates from xx.xx.xxxx to xx.xx.xxxx against the said liability to the Plaintiff on xx.xx.xxxx and all cheques became dishonored on different dates up to xx.xx.xxxx. It is further denied that further cause of action arose when the Plaintiff sent a legal notice to the Defendant against the said dishonor cheques and said legal notice was properly served upon the Defendant and last legal notice was sent to the Defendant on xx.xx.xxxx the said legal notice was refused by the Defendant also acknowledged the liability and statement of account of the Plaintiff company was duly confirmed by the Defendant on xx.xx.xxxx. It is further denied that further cause of action arose when the Plaintiff filed a pre-litigation application before Mediation, Delhi and Hon’ble Court issued the summons to the Defendant and Defendant intentionally and knowingly did not appear despite service thereafter CDLSA Delhi was pleased to issue non-starter report in favour of the Plaintiff on xx.xx.xxxx. It is further denied that the cause of action for filing this present suit is still continuing. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

13.        That the contents of para 13 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that the Defendant visited the office of the Plaintiff to purchase the knitted hosiery items from time to time and Defendant supplied the knitted hosiery items to the Defendant with full satisfaction of the Defendant. It is further denied that the cause of action of filing of the suit has arose at Delhi, therefore this Hon’ble Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try and to decide the suit. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

14.        That the contents of para 14 of the plaint are wrong and denied. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

15.        That the contents of para 15 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that Defendant intentionally didn’t appear in pre-mediation settlement proceeding. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

16.        That the contents of para 16 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that the present case is being filed within the stipulated period as prescribed under the law. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

17.        That the contents of para 17 of the plaint are legal para, need no reply. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

18.        That the contents of para 18 of the plaint are wrong and denied. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

19.        That the contents of para 19 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that the Plaintiff is legally entitled to recover the suit amount and the suit filed by the Plaintiff is bonafide. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply and the contents of preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

It is respectfully submitted that the present suit is absolutely false, frivolous, baseless, misconceived and vexatious besides being unsustainable in law, and therefore, the same is liable to be dismissed with compensatory costs.

Prayer para of the plaint along with its sub-paras are absolutely wrong and specifically denied. Hence, the plaintiff is not entitled for any relief claim for.

P R A Y E R

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may dismiss the plaint of the plaintiff with heavy costs in favour of the answering Defendant and against the Plaintiff for unnecessary dragging the answering defendant in the frivolous litigation, in the interest of justice, equity and circumstances of the case.

Pass such further order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and may pass in favour of the answering defendant, in the interest of justice.

It is prayed accordingly.

DEFENDANT

DELHI      

DATED:                        THROUGH

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,

NEW DELHI-110014.

EMAIL: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

PHONE: +xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

VERIFICATION :-

Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of June, 2023 that the contents of paras No.1 to 19 of the written statement are true and correct to the defendant’s knowledge and as per legal information received and believed to be true, further, the contents of paras 1 to …… of the preliminary submission are true and correct to the defendant’s knowledge and as per legal information received and believed to be true.

Last is the prayer to this Hon’ble Court.

                                                DEFENDANT

IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH; LD. DISTRICT JUDGE; (COMMERCIAL COURT-06); DIST. CENTRAL,

TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI.

CS (COMM.) NO. xxxx OF 2022.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                      : PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                             : DEFENDANT

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Mr. xxxxxxxxxxx, Proprietor of M/s. xxxxxxxxxx, having office at xxxx, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, presently at New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:

1.                 That I am the Defendant in the above case and am thoroughly conversant with the facts and circumstances, pursuant to the information provided to me, thereof and am competent to swear this affidavit.

2.                 That the accompanying written statement to the plaint, have been drafted by my counsel as per my instruction and the contents of the same have been duly read over and understood by me and after fully understanding the contents of the same, I hereby state that the facts therein are all true and correct to my knowledge.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :-

Verified at New Delhi on ___ day of  June, 2023 that the contents of above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT