BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL

IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT AT CHENNAI

O.S No. 7239 of 2022

1. M. Shahul Hameed
S/o. M. Mohammed Gani

2. M. Subur Niza
W/o. Abdul Hameed

Both residing at
Old No. 2, New No. 3,
Mannar Street,
T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017 …Plaintiffs

Vs.

M. Mohammed Rabi
S/o. M. Mohammed Gani
Residing at
Old No. 2, New No. 3,
Mannar Street,
T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017 …Defendants

WRITTEN STATEMENT & COUBTER CLAIM UNDER ORDER VIII

RULE 1 & 6A OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

The Defendants states as follows:

1. The address for service of all notices and processes on the Defendant is that of

their counsel M/s. P.B. RAMANUJAM ASSOCIATES & M. JAGADHEESAN

having office at No. 19, Law Chambers, High Court Buildings, Chennai - 600 104.

2. At the very outset, the Defendant denies all the allegations and averments made

out against this Defendant in the Plaint as baseless, self-serving, devoid of facts

and unsustainable in law.

3. This Defendant respectfully states that the averments in paragraph (3) and (4) of

the Plaint are admitted since the same relates to the flow of title, physical features

and relationship of the parties prior to the Defendant’s interest arising in the suit

scheduled property. It is further stated that immediately after the death of his

mother, K.M.U Dowlath Beevi, the Plaintiffs, the Defendant herein, their father

Mr. Mohammed Gani and their sister Ramzan Beevi were entitled to 1/8 th share of

their mother’s ½ share in the suit scheduled property.

4. This Defendant further respectfully states that the averments made in paragraph

(5) is misleading and lacks the actual facts relating to the conveyance. It is further

stated that this Defendant is residing in the ground floor of the suit scheduled

property and his father Mohammed Gani who was residing with the Plaintiff in the

first floor of the suit scheduled property suffered severe humiliations by the 1 st

Plaintiff in a property dispute where the 1 st Plaintiff tortured the Defendant’s to

give the consideration amounts received in selling the property lying Kammudhi,

Ramanathapuram District which made him to move into the custody of this

Defendant and it was only this Defendant’s father who voluntarily came forward

to execute a Deed of Settlement with an idea of making some provision during his

life time itself to this Defendant being his younger son, and conveyed 1094 sq. ft.

of undivided share in favor of this Defendant reserving life interest over the

conveyed share.

5. This Defendant further respectfully states that the averments made in paragraph

(6) are not true and concocted with malicious intentions. This Defendant did even
 make such a conveyance in the name of his father, to the best knowledge of this

Defendant’s father it was him who was reluctant to not release his 1/8 th share and

the Plaintiffs had absolute knowledge about it even before when they made such a

conveyance.

6. This Defendant further respectfully state that the averments in paragraph (7) are

not extracted with real facts on the whole, this Defendant’s father was constantly

compelled and influenced by the Plaintiffs to make such a conveyance and this

Defendant’s father agreed to make a Deed of Settlement in favor of the Plaintiffs

on two conditions, firstly the Plaintiffs should partition the suit schedule property

as per divisions proposed by him and secondly, the conveyance should be subject

to his life interest on the suit scheduled property. Moreover the Defendant’s father

Mohammed Gani was only interested in favor of the 1 st Plaintiff and the Defendant

being his sons and not in the favor of the 2 nd Plaintiff since he has already settled a

property in Purasawakkam in her favor. The 2 nd Plaintiff’s husband Abdul Hameed

knowing the marketable value of the suit scheduled property approached the

Defendant’s father to settle a minor portion of the suit scheduled property in the

favor of the 2nd Plaintiff with a greedy motive which was denied by the

Defendant’s father. Ultimately, the said Abdul Hameed and the 2 nd Plaintiff

influenced the 1st Plaintiff and colluded all together with an offer to this

Defendant’s father that the 1st Plaintiff will give up a portion of his share to his

sister, the 2nd Plaintiff for which the Defendant’s father instructed the 1 st Plaintiff

to make a separate conveyance in his sister’s share. Even on the very day of

registration, the Plaintiffs also promised the Defendant’s father that all the
 conditions put forth by him were been incorporated in the Deed of Settlements.

The Defendant’s father went to the Registration office with full and blind hope

and trust on his son and daughter only to be cheated by them.

7. This Defendant further states that the relationship between the Plaintiffs and his

father was smooth sailing until when the Defendant’s father who was residing in

the ground floor along with this Defendant decided to put up an additional toilet

for his usage, the Plaintiffs obstructed the construction of the same stating that it

will hinder their rights and enjoyment of the suit scheduled property, since the

Defendant’s father has settled his interests over the suit scheduled property. In his

defense the Defendant’s father firmly stated about his reserved right of enjoyment

and usage until his lifetime to which the Plaintiffs blatantly conveyed to this

Defendant’s father that there exist no provision of life interest over their shares.

The Defendant’s father was severely shocked to know that the Plaintiffs have

fraudulently documented the subjected Deed of Settlements without reserving the

life interests. The Defendant’s father was severely disappointed to know that his

own son and daughter have colluded to cheat him fraudulently by going against

his wishes. On the very same day, this issue became a quarrel among the parties

and it resulted in Defendant’s father lodging police complaint before the

Mambalam Police Station.

8. This Defendant further states that the after the incident the Plaintiffs started

showing their true colors and unleashed severe mental agony and torture by

preventing him in peacefully enjoying his share in the suit scheduled property by
 restricting the access to the upper floors of the super structure, common parking

space, land, gates to the suit scheduled property. Being a rightful share holder in

the suit scheduled property; this Defendant was harassed mentally by the

Plaintiffs. In fact, this Defendant’s father feeling cheated fraudulently decided to

cancel the Deed of Settlements in their favor. Being a senior citizen himself and

the cruelties and agonies meted by the Plaintiffs during his lifetime approached the

concerned Registration officials to cancel the conveyance in favor of the Plaintiffs.

The Plaintiffs having clear knowledge about it, has rushed to this Hon’ble Court

with a suit for partition with misleading averments and allegations.

9. The averments in paragraph (8) are self-serving and made conveniently for the

Plaintiffs. It is true that the father of this Defendant cancelled two Deed of

Settlements in favor of this Defendant to make a clear and effective title for this

Defendant in the Deed of Settlement dated 17/12/2020 bequeathing his entire

undivided share 1178 sq.ft. The allegations made in paragraph (9) are strictly

denied as baseless. This Defendant states that having a clear and absolute share of

1178 sq.ft. he still holds 1/8th share from his mother’s 1/2th share. Having played

fraud on their own father, the Plaintiffs do not hold any rights over the suit

scheduled property.

10. The allegations made in paragraph (10) are baseless and self-serving which have

been concocted to prejudice the mind of this Hon’ble Court. The legal

correspondences would prove the very bone of the tortures and mental agony

caused by the Plaintiffs. At the risk of repetition, this Defendant states that the
 Plaintiffs are not entitled for any reliefs leave alone a relief of partition and

injunction and the question of mesne profits would not even arise when the

Plaintiffs who have been in uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of other floor

and having restricted this Defendant from enjoying his rightful possession, the

Plaintiffs are only liable to pay the same. This Defendant further states that the

Plaintiffs have not approached this Hon’ble Court with clean hands.

11. This Defendant further state that there is no merit or bona fides, but only mala

fides in the captioned suit as framed and the Plaintiffs are not entitled for any

purported relief from this Defendant, and the captioned suit, as framed, is liable to

be dismissed as not maintainable.

12. This Defendant further states that the present suit does not reveal any cause of

action and entire Plaint has been drafted by the Plaintiffs with mala fide intentions

to escape from their liabilities and in absence of the any true facts and cause of

action the same is a fit case for rejection of Plaint under the procedures of Code of

Civil Procedure. Moreover, the above captioned suit is heavily hit by non-joinder

of necessary parties, Mohammed Gani. The Defendant reserves his right to file

separate applications for the same at earliest. The Defendant states that the above

captioned suit as framed is not maintainable, under both fact and law, and

deserved to be dismissed with exemplary costs.

13. The cause of action for the Counter claim arose within the jurisdiction of this

Hon’ble Court in December, 2022 upon the receipt of summons in an application

 preferred by the Defendant’s father to implead himself in the above suit where he

has has informed the Defendant that the Plaintiffs have fraudulently influenced

him in making the said conveyances being Deed of Settlement and also the

Plaintiffs started threatening and harassing this Defendant and his father which

eventually resulted in the parties lodging police complaints in the local jurisdiction

and subsequently

14. The Defendant is valuing the Counter claim for a relief of declaration and

injunction, valuing it for Rs. 6,000/- and pays a Court fees of Rs. 180/- as per the

Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act 1955.

15. The Defendant, therefore, pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass a

judgment and decree:

a) Declaring the Deed of Settlements dated 20/08/2020 bearing Document

No. 1186 of 2020 and Document No. 1188 of 2020 on the file of S.R.O

Thyagaraya Nagar as null and void and not binding on the Defendant.

b) Granting a permanent injunction restraining the Plaintiffs, their agents,

assignees, men, servants, or anybody acting through or on behalf of them,

from interfering with the Defendant’s peaceful possession and enjoyment

of the Suit Schedule Property.

c) Directing the Plaintiffs to pay the cost of the suit and pass such further or

other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the

circumstances of the case, and thus, render justice.

 Dated at Chennai on 12th day of March 2024

Counsel for Defendant Defendant

LIST OF DOCUMENTS UNDER ORDER VIII RULE –A OF

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908.

S.No Date Particulars of the Parties to the Nature of the

. Document Document Document

C.S.R. in 170 of 2023

1. 28/04/2023 on the file of R1- Mohammed Gani Original
Mambalam Police and the 1st Plaintiff
Station
C.S.R. in 539 of 2023
2. 19/11/2023 on the file of R1- Defendant and the Original
Mambalam Police 1st Plaintiff
Station
Dated at Chennai on 12th day of March 2024

Counsel for Defendant

VERIFICATION

I, Mohamed Rabi, the Defendant above named, do hereby verify and declare that what all

are stated above in the foregoing paragraphs 1 to 15 are true to the best of my knowledge,

belief and information.

Verified at Chennai on 12th day of March 2024

Defendant