Cat reply 1 in Marathi

REPLY OF THE DEFENDANT TO THE APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 39 RULES 1 & 2 AND SECTION 151 C. P. C.

IN THE COURT OF....................

C. D................................................................... Plaintiff

versus 

C. F................................................................ Defendant

Date of hearing............................

Sir,

The defendants respectfully submits as follows:

1. In reply to Para 1 of the application it is not denied that the plaintiff has filed a false, frivolous suit in this Court. It is also submitted that the allegations made in the plaint are entirely false, baseless, untrue and concocted one. The defendants are filing herewith written statement. The same may be read as part of this reply, which shows the correct facts,

2. Para 2 of the application is wrong and is denied.

3. Para 3 of the application is not denied.

4. Para 4 of the application is wrong and is denied. The suit of the plaintiff cannot be decreed merely because the defendants will take possession under the decree passed and for which execution is pending in the court of....................

5. Para 5 of the application is wrong and is denied. It is denied that the respondents are not entitled for the possession as the decree which is subject matter of execution pending in the court of.................... was obtained by the father of the respondents No. 2 to 8 and husband of respondent No 1. by applying fraud on the plaintiff as well as upon the Hon?ble Court of..................... in suit No..................... and in the interest of justice, the said execution is required to be stayed. No such stay can be granted.

6. Para 6 of the application is wrong and is denied. It is denied that if the respondent will succeed in getting possession of the suit property in execution of the said decree the applicant will suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in terms of money. In fact, it is the defendants who will suffer irreparable loss and injury in case the execution of the decree is stayed.

7. Para 7 of the application is wrong and is denied. Plaintiff has no case what to say of a good prima-facie 

REPLY TO APPLICATION U/O 39, RULES 1 AND 2, SECTION 151 C.P.C.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE....................

Suit No..................... of 19....................

LA. No..................... of 19....................

In the matter of:

A. B................................................................... Plaintiff

versus

C. F................................................................ Defendant

Respectfully Showeth:

1. That the defendant respondent has filed the accompanying statement with material denials, allegations and contentions which need not be repeated herein for the sake of brevity praying that the same may kindly be read as a part of this reply.

2. Contents of para No. 2 are emphatically denied. It is submitted that the defendant never parted with the possession of his land physically or symbolically. The stipulation to this effect in the alleged agreement which was only signed by the defendant in Hindi, was never made known or explained to the defendant, nor it came to the defendant?s notice at any stage of time that the plaintiff is likely to lay claim of possession on the defendant?s/respondent?s land till he received the reply of his notice. As a matter of fact this provision of delivery of possession and authorising him to call the land through page 2 of the agreement allegedly executed by the defendant/respondent, is an overt statement/stipulation, never made known to the defendant/respondent. It is further submitted that it is known to no law that the so-called vendor becomes authorised/entitled to sell the agreed land even before payment of consideration and acquiring title in it. It is a settled law that an agreement to sell passes no title in the so-called vendor.