IN THE COURT OF SHRI JITEN MEHRA, ADDITIONAL DISRTICT

JUDGE, CENTRAL DISTRICT, TIS HAZRAZRI COURTS, DELHI

Civil suit No.- 721/2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mayank chandalia & anr. .… Plaintiffs
Versus.

Gurminder Singh …. Defendant

REPLY ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT TO THE APPLICATION

UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 READ WITH SECTION 151 CPC
FILED BY PLAINTIFFs FOR AMANDMENT OF PLAINT.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH

PRELIMINARY OBJECTION
1. That the application filed by the plaintiffs for seeking the
amendment in the plaint, is not relevant in the eyes of law, and
the amendment of prayer clauses stating in the application are
unjust and not necessary for the purpose of determining the real
issues which is controversy between the parties.

2 That the plaintiffs are misusing the actual purpose of the order
6 rule 17 of CPC and impeding the nature of the suit which is
unfair and not compressive for the plaintiffs. Hence, the application
is liable to dismissed in the interest of justice.

3. That in the application, plaintiffs are seeking to amend the

Prayer Paras of plaint A. & C. by reproducing as AA. para which
states that the pass a decree of declaration and possession,
thereby declaring the plaintiffs as co-owners to their 2/3 rd
respective share in the disputed suit property and by reproducing
as CC. para which states that the directing the defendant to pay a
sum of at least Rs. 50,000/- per month for illegally occupying and
possessing the disputed suit properties. It is submitted that
plaintiffs cleverly seeking the partition of the disputed suit
property, possession and claiming unjustifiable sum of Rs.
50,000/- per month which cause substantial changes in the nature
of the suit, claim and cause of action, as it also alters the basic
structure/feature of the suit and cleverly setup an entirely new
case and claim which is against the order 6 rule 17 and deceiving
the court for gain an unfair advantage. Hence, application is liable
to be dismissed with punitive cost and in interest of justice.

4. That the plaintiffs are seeking amendments in the plaint with a

malafide intention and impeding the interest of justice, as it
changes the nature of the suit and subject matter which amount to
irreparable lose and unfairly prejudice to the defendant. Hence,
application is liable to dismissed in the interest of justice.

5. That the plaintiffs requested for amendment of plaint cause an

unfairness and inefficiency in the legal process and violates the
legal rights of the defendant and in result of justice. Hence, cost
must be awarded to mitigate the hardship that caused to the
defendant while allowing the application for amendment of plaint
by the plaintiffs and application liable to be dismissed in interest of
justice.

REPLY ON MERITS

1. That contents of the para no.1 of the application are admitted,

hence needs no reply.

2. That the contents of the Para no.2 of the application are

partially admitted and partially false, frivolous, wrong and
procrastinate, hence denied in toto. It is admitted that the
plaintiffs has filed the suit for declaration, possession, damages,
mandatory and permanent injunction but however, it is denied that
the inadvertently the plaintiffs omitted the relief of possession and
mentioned owners instead of co-owner with their respective
shares. In reply to the same it is submitted that the plaintiffs with
malafide intention moved an application for amendment of plaint
just to deceive the court for gain an unfair advantage. It is further
submitted that the amendments stated in the application are
unjust and not necessary for the purposes of determining the real
issues which is controversy between the parties. Hence, the
application for amendment in the plaint liable to dismissed with
heavy cost and in interest of justice.

3(a to cc). That the contents of the para no.3 (a to cc) of the
application are false, frivolous, wrong, and baseless, hence denied
in toto. It is denied that the plaintiffs seek the indulgence of this
Hon’ble Court to amend the plaint in this regard. It is further
denied that the plaintiffs want to amend para-a & c of the
amended plaint in the following paras, originally the prayer paras
are reproduced as under:

Prayer Paras
a. That pass a decree of declaration declaring the plaintiffs as
the owners of the suit properties thereby directing the defendant
to vacate the suit properties and handover the vacant and peaceful
possession of the suit property to the plaintiffs being the owners of
the suit properties bearing no. 4/28, First Floor, Saraswati Marg,
WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi left side portion measuring 80 sq.
yards consisting of 2 Rooms, Hall, Latrine Bath room, Kitchen,
etc., and property bearing No. 4/28, First Floor, Saraswati Marg,
WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi right side Portion measuring 850 Sq.
Fit Consisting 3 Rooms, Hall, Latrine Bath room, Kitchen, etc which
is specifically shown in red colour in the site plan which is illegally
and unlawfully occupied by the defendant.
Now it reproduced as under:

aa. That pass a decree of declaration and possession, thereby

declaring the plaintiffs as co-owners to their 2/3° respective shares
in the suit properties bearing no. 4/28, First Floor, Saraswati Marg,
WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi left side portion measuring 80 sq.
yards consisting of 2 Rooms, Hall, Latrine Bath room, Kitchen,
etc., and property bearing No. 4/28, First Floor, Saraswati Marg,
WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi right side Portion measuring 850 Sq.
Fit Consisting 3 Rooms, Hall, Latrine Bath room, Kitchen, etc.
which is specifically shown in red colour in the site plan thereby
directing the defendant to vacate the suit properties and handover
the vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property to the
plaintiffs being the co-owners of the suit properties which is
illegally and unlawfully occupied by the defendant.
c. That Costs of the suit/damages may be granted in favour of the
plaintiffs and against the defendant for illegally occupying the suit
property and further a cost and expenses as per the provisions of
Order XXA rule 1 & (2) of C.P.C. read with rules framed by the
High Court Rules & laws applicable as this Hon'ble Court may deem
fit and proper in the prevailing circumstances of the case may also
be allowed.

Now it reproduced as under:

cc. Directing the defendant to pay a sum of at least Rs. 50,000
p.m. for illegally occupying and possessing the suit properties
bearing no.
4/28, First Floor, Saraswati Marg, WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi left
side portion measuring 80 sq. yards consisting of 2 Rooms, Hall,
Latrine Bath room, Kitchen, etc., and property bearing No. 4/28,
First Floor, Saraswati Marg, WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi right side
Portion measuring 850 Sq. Fit Consisting 3 Rooms, Hall, Latrine
Bath room, Kitchen, etc from the date filing of the suit and till the
date of vacate of above mentioned suit properties.

In reply to the same it is submitted that the plaintiffs in application

requested for amendment of prayer clause a & c by reproduced as
aa & cc in plaint are unjust and not necessary for the purpose of
determining the real issues which is controversy between the
parties. It is further submitted that the plaintiffs cleverly seeking
the partition of the disputed suit property, possession and claiming
unjustifiable sum of Rs. 50,000/- per month which is substantially
changing the nature of the suit, claim and cause of action and its
setup an entirely new case and claim which cause prejudice to the
defendant and deceiving the court for gain an unfair advantage.
Hence, is liable to be dismissed with punitive cost and in interest of
justice.

4. That the contents of Para No. 4 of the application is false,

frivolous, wrong and baseless, hence denied in toto. It is denied
that if the present application is not allowed then the plaintiffs
shall suffer irreparable loss and without the said amendments in
pleading the real question in controversy shall not be determined
properly. In reply to the same it is submitted that the application
has no relevancy in the eyes of law and reproduced para-aa & cc
of prayer clause in the application of amendment are unjust and
not necessary for determine the real issues between the parties. It
is further submitted that if the application is allowed it cause
irreparable lose and unfairly prejudice to the defendant, hence the
application is liable to be dismissed with heavy cost and in interest
of justice.

5. That the contents of Para No.5 of the application are false,

frivolous, wrong and baseless, hence denied in toto. It is denied
that the present application is moved bonafide and in the interest
of justice and the plaintiff’s inter-alia seek the following
amendments in the pleading and prayer of the present suit. In
reply to the same it is submitted that the plaintiffs moved the
application for amendment in plaint with malafide intention and to
impeding the interest of justice and deceiving the court to gain
unfair advantage, which cause inefficiency in the legal process and
violates the legal rights of the defendant and in result of justice. It
is further submitted plaintiffs have not approached this Hon’ble
Court with clean hands and such the application is nothing but the
bogus and considering the said application is totally a wastage of
precious time of this Hon’ble court hence, application is liable to be
dismissed with heavy cost.

6. That the contents of para no.6 of the application are false,

frivolous, wrong and baseless, hence denied in toto. It is denied
that the amendment being minor, if allowed will not change the
nature of case nor subject matter and the facts necessary for
proper adjudication of the suit would be brought on records by way
of amendment and the proposed amendment sought. In reply to
the same it is submitted that the application for amendment in the
plaint has no relevancy in the eyes of law, and the reproducing
paras -aa & cc of prayer clause in the application are unjust and
not necessary for the purpose of determining the real issues which
is controversy between the parties. It is further submitted that
plaintiffs cleverly seeking the partition of the disputed suit
property, possession and claiming unjustifiable sum of Rs.
50,000/- per month which is substantially changing the nature of
the suit, claim and cause of action, and its alters the basic
structure/feature of the suit and cleverly setup an entirely new
case and claim, which is against the Order 6 Rule 17 and cause
prejudice to the defendant if its allowed. Hence, application for
amendment of plaint is liable to be dismissed with heavy cost in
interest of justice.

That the contents of the prayer clause are wrong and denied.

PRAYER

It is therefore, most respectfully prayed to this Hon’ble Court that

the application filed by the plaintiffs under order VI rule 17 of CPC
for amendment of plaint may kindly be dismissed with exemplary
cost to be awarded in favour of answering defendant and against
the plaintiffs in the interest of justice.

Any other order may kindly be passed in favour of the defendant

at this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in view of the
above-mentioned reasons and in interest of justice.

Defendant
Place - New Delhi Through
Date – .0 .2024

G.L. SONI & ASSOCIATES

Office at 8A/2G Basement, WEA,
Karol Bagh Delhi 110005
Email-glsoniadvsc@gmail.com
Mobile - 9910168623
IN THE COURT OF SHRI JITEN MEHRA, ADDITIONAL DISRTICT
JUDGE, CENTRAL DISTRICT, TIS HAZRAZRI COURTS, DELHI

Civil suit No.- 721/2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mayank chandalia & anr. .… Plaintiffs
Versus.

Gurminder Singh …. Defendant

AFFIDAVIT

I, Gurminder Singh, S/o Shri Jaswinder Singh, R/o House No. 6A/26,
IInd floor, W.E.A, Karol Bagh do hereby solemnly affirm and declare
as under:-

1 That I am the Defendant in the above noted Application under reply,

and am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and
competent to swear the present affidavit.

2 That the accompanying Application under reply is prepared by my

counsel under my instruction and contents of the same are true and
correct to my knowledge and the same may be read as part of this
affidavit as the same are not being repeated here for the sake of brevity.

DEPONENT
Verification: I, the above named Deponent do hereby verify that the
content of para 1 and 2 of above affidavit are true and correct to my
knowledge and nothing is deposed falsely. Verified at Delhi on this
____ Day of. , 2024

DEPONENT