IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE (NAGPUR) NAGPUR

SUIT NO. _______ OF 2023

(SUIT UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908)

IN THE MATTER OF
M/s Zoon Construction Pvt. Ltd.
A Company Incorporated under the
Companies Act, 2013, Having Registered Office
At Nagpur.
Through its Director
Mr. Ranjan Mathur
………………..…. PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
M/s Tamas Pvt. Ltd.
A Company Incorporated under the
Companies Act, 2013, Having Registered Office
At Nagpur
Through its Director
Mr. Vijay Ruia
……………….. DEFENDANT

Written Statement on Behalf of Defendant

Most Respectfully Showeth:

PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:

1. That the suit is barred by limitation and is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.
2. That this Hon’ble Court has no jurisdiction to entertain and try this suit because the
plaintiff and defendant entered a contract dated 15.09.2020 wherein the terms and
 conditions clearly stated that nay dispute between the parties should be referred to
arbitration and no court will have jurisdiction unless the arbitral tribunal gives an award.
3. That the Plaintiff is a well-established private limited company engaged in construction,
engineering, and designing services. The company is registered under the Companies
Act, 2013 and has its registered office located at 160, Vijay Pratap Nagar, Nagpur.
4. That the Defendant, Tamas Pvt Ltd, is also a private limited company registered under
the Companies Act, 2013 and has its registered office located at 120, Rani bagh, Nashik
with an administrative office in Nagpur.
5. That the suit has not been properly valued for the purpose of court fees and jurisdiction
and is therefore liable to rejected outrightly.
6. That there is absolutely no cause of action in favour of the Plaintiff and against the
Defendant. The suit is therefore liable to be rejected on this ground also.
7. That the suit is bad non-joinder of necessary party namely State Bank of India.
8. That if the check was dishonored on the alleged date, then it is a complete fault on the
bank side as the defendant had sufficient amount in his account hence the proper party
against whom the suit can be filed against State Bank of India.

On Merits:
Without prejudice to the preliminary objections stated above, the reply on merits, which is
without prejudice to one another, is as under- 

1. That the contents of para 1, 3 and 4 of the plaint are absolutely correct and are admitted.
2. That the content of para 2 of the plaint is denied as the suit is barred by limitation.
3. That para 5 of the plaint is incorrect that the construction work was not satisfactorily
completed and handed over in June 2022.
4. That the contents of para 6 of the plaint are denied for want of knowledge. The Defendant
disputes the claim made by the Plaintiff for this amount, considering the bill to be
unjustified and excessive.
5. That the content of para 7 and 8 of the plaint is denied as there was sufficient fund in the
defendants account to honour the cheque.
 6. That the content of para 9 of the plaint is denied as the mandatory notice which is
required to be send by plaintiff within 30 days of the dishonour of cheque was send after
the expiry of 30 days limit i.e., on 12.12.2022.
7. That the content of para 10 of the plaint is denied because as per the original contract
between the parties all the dispute arising between the parties are subject to the
jurisdiction of the Nasik court.
8. That the content of para 10 of the plaint is denied as the suit has not been properly valued
for the purpose of court fees.

The Defendant respectfully prays that this Honorable Court may dismiss the complaint with
costs, as the Plaintiff is not entitled to the relief sought in the complaint.

9. Prayer
1. Dismiss the suit of the plaintiff.
2. Award costs to the defendant.
3. Passing such further order as the honourable court may deem fit.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE HUMBLE DEFENDENT AS IN DUTY

BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.

NAGPUR Tamas Pvt. Ltd. ……….

Defendant

02/02/2023 Through Advocate Vijay

Diwan

VERIFICATION:

Verified at Delhi on 4th day of February 2023 that the contents of paras 1 to 10 of the plaint are
true to my personal knowledge and are true and correct on the basis of legal advice received and
believed to be true. Last para is prayer to the Hon’ble Court.

Tamas Pvt. Ltd. ………. Defendant