oe “jet ‘le a IN THE COURT OF SHRI P.K.JAIN, A.D.J., DELHI SUIT NO.32/1997 INTHE MATTER OF SHRI SHEOTA] SINGH & ORS. PLAINTIFFS VERSUS. SHRI KAILASH SATYARTHI & ANR, DEFENDANTS. D.O.H. 21.08.2008 REPLY ON BEHALF APPLICATION OF THE PLAINTIFF THE DEFENDENT NO. 1 AND 2 MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: PRELIM RY OBJECTION: That dhe present application is not maintainable and Hable w be dismissed with heavy costs for the reason that the above suit filed before this Hon'ble Court is under Section 92 of CPC and thus no such application can be filed which is beyond the scope of the provisions of $.92. The trust in question namely Mukti Pratishthan and the Society called Association For Voluntary Action (AVA) are two separate entities. AVA is a duly registered organisation under the Societies Registration Act and is in existence since the year 1979. The sole intention of the Pls tif?S, while acting in collusion and conspiracy with one Swami Agnivesh, at whose instance and behest the present suit has been tiled, is to prevent the answering Defendants from carrying out any welfare activities for the poor and downtrodden, and on the other hand achieve their political and. That the present application filed by pl commercial ends even by usurping the properties of the trust namely Mukti Pratishthan, The application under reply is miseoneeived both in facts and in law, intiff no. 1 is an abuse of the process of the court and of law also for the reason that the same hhas been filed out of sheer ill-will and grudge and to settle personal seores with the answering defendants. The Plaintiffs have been set up by the said Swami Agnivesh and are acting in conspiracy: with malafid and at the instructions of Swami Agnivesh, entions to usurp the various properties of the trust namely Mukti Pratishthan. The said Swami ivesh while acting in collusion with the plaintifis has already wespassed into and grabbed the following properties belonging to the Trust in question: A. Office of the Trust at 7, Jantar Mantar Road, New Delhi situated on prime nd and centrally located in VIP Area which is worth several crores, B. Land measuring acres belonging to the Trust situated at Village: Bhelpa, Gurgaon (Haryana) which is worth ‘That the present application is also not maintainable for the simple reason that it is factually misconceived as is apparent from the report of the Court Receiver appointed by this Hon'ble Court. The Court Receiver! Local Commissioner has filed an interim report and a final report is still awaited. ‘The said report shows that Swami Agnivesh with whose complicity the Plaintiffs are acting, are in illegal possession of the records and the movable and immovable properties of Mukti Pratishthan. That the above mentioned facts stand proved from the interim report of the Court Receiver and the criminal complaint lodged by the court receiver at Police Station -Connaught Place, particularly against Swami Agnivesh, wherein she has clearly stated that she was abused and physically prevented from entering the office premises at 7 Jantar Mantar Road, New Delhi by Swami Agnivesh and others when she went wo visit the properties of the trust upon directions of this Hon'ble Court, The answering Defendants reserve their right to advert to the report of the Court Receiver at the time of hearing of the present application. While the court is still to take into consideration the various aspects mentioned in the interim report dated 7.8,1998, the plaintif? ho.1 has filed the present application after a lapse of more than 9 yrs, which itself speaks about the malafides on his part. The present application has been filed with ulterior motives to browbeat the answering defendants and compel them to give up their resistance to the attempts of the Plaintiffs and Swami Agnivesh in grabbing the properties of the tr st 5. That it is a matter of record now that substantial records of Mukti Pratishthan have been recovered by the Court Receiver from the custody of Swami gnivesh, which itself proves his direct involvement and association in the criminal acts alongwith the Plaintiffs. 6. It is pertinent to bring to the knowledge of this Hon"ble court that the above suit is actus gation initia and by the abovementione Swami 2 .gnivesh through the plaintiffs who are all his own men and have conspired together with @ fraudulent intention to usurp the properties of the trust wherein they were not even settlor trustees. REPLY ON MERITS ~ Para 1 & 2: The contents of para | and 2 of the application being matter of record need no replyry Para 3: Contents of para 3 as stated are absolutely wrong, baseless and hollow and are thus denied. The applicant is true in saying th certain important developments have taken place with respect to the Properties of the trust, but it is the applicant himself who is totally responsible for concealing and suppressing these facts trom this hon’ble court and is thus guilty of “SUPPRESSIO VERI SUGGESTIO FALSI”. He is thus also liable for penal offences. The actual fact is tha the applicant Sheotaj Singh in collusion and conspiracy with one Swami Agnivesh has been misusing and misappropriating the various Properties belonging to the trust by commercialising propertv/ premises and using the same for illegal activities against the aims and objectives of the trust. It is pertinent to bring 10 the notice of this Hon'ble court ‘hat the head office of the trust, ie, 7 Jantar Mantar Road, New Delhi, is in the illegal and unauthorised occupation of the said Swami Agnivesh and his henchmen alongwith the applicant himself who is hand in glove with these people and even the trustees of the trust are not being allowed to enter the premises. Moreover, many plots of land around the (ust office are forcibly and illegally being occupi by the abovesaid Swami Agnivesh. These facts are proved from the interim report submitted by the court receiver and the complaint filed by her at P.S. Parliament Street, a copy of which is already on the court file and is pending consideration The above said Swami Agnivesh who is not associated with the ‘rast in any manner whatsoever is also illegally and unauthorisedly in occupation of another propery belonging to the trust at village Bhelpa Haryana which is more than 3 Acres of land in collusion with the applicant. Also, it has come to the knowledge of the defendents that the various other properties the trust, including the official vehicle Maruti Gypsy no. DL 3C 2406, and various other movable properties have been illegally disposed off by the applicant during the pendency of the suit, which clearly amounts to contempt of this Hon'ble cout Wis also pertinent to bring to the notice of this Hon'ble court that the abovementioned Swami Agnivesh, at whose behest and intructions the Plaintiffs are acting, is « habitual land grabber and there are manycases pending against him in various courts for land and_ property grabbing, cheating and illegal occupation of properties in various courts in and outside Delhi. The Plaintifis and the said Swami Agnivesh hw ¥ out the illegal activities of grabbing formed a caucus to ca properties, as stated above. It has also come to the knowledge of the answering defendents that the applicant has opened and is operating various bank accounts in and outside Delhi either singly, jointly and benami alongwith Swati Agnivesh misappropriating, embezzling and siphoning off eamed from the trust properties. Some of the names of the benani o mnisations run fraudulently by these two persons are Dharm Pratishthan * Bandhua Mukti Morcha © Sarvdeshik Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Sarvdeshik Arya Yuvak Parishad © Arya Sabha, © Adhyatma Jeagaran Manch and various other trusts and societies.. The applicant alongwith Swami .\ ivesh may kindly be directed vo furnish the details of ali their sources of funding for all these organisations and list the foreign funding sources, both domestic and foreign, the legalities of the organisations and funding receipts, balance sheets, details of receipts and j yyments, and details pertaining to FCRA stration. They should fi approvals and 5 ther be directed to furnish details of all their properties (personal as well as in the name of vativus trusts with which they are either directly or indirectly associated) movable and immovable, and other assets, bank accounts, etc. including shares, debentures, mutual funds details and other investments, and also details of court ¢: st them in es pentli various courts. The Plaintiffs are themselves wrongdocis. They are using the machinery of law to achieve their ulterior motives. “FT e court receiver may again be directed to take possession and custody of all these properties and assets, aecounts, documents, ete. and their bank accounts be seized. {is thus apparent trom the above information that the applic given a false statement with respect to the funds of the trust and is tuying to take advantage of his own wrongs. The allegations made by the applicant against the answering defendents are false 10 his own knowledge and thus the application filed by him being frivolous and meritless is liable to be dismissed with heavy costs and in view of the settled principles of law, the suit which has been filed with vested interests, ill will, and personal grudge is itself liable dismissed with exemplary costs upon the plaintifi | Its specifically wrong and denied that the defendents no, | and 2 have intentionally created such a situation for their own benefit and/or that they siphoned off the money and donating agency from said trust to AVA as alleged. It is specifically denied that the answering defendants have siphoned off funds of the Trust on the contrary, it is the Plainttts alongwith Swami Agnivesh who ore misusing and misap ting Properties of the trust and have amassed wealth worth several crores by carrying on illegal activities from the trust premises! properties by commercial utilisation of the same. Infact, they are actually: siphori fT the money earned through ill id unauthorised use of the trust properties and utilising these amow 's for personal gains and to nurture their political ambitions. The said Swami Agnivesh who has himself’ criminally trespassed into the trust properties and is illegally using the same by running various trusts and other illegal activities from the Premises, has further sub-let the wust properties in cullusion and conspiracy with the Plaintiffs to other strangers thereby abetting to and allowing further criminal trespass in the trust properties. As far as giving of donations is concerned, it is the total discretion ofa donor agency to either give donations to 1 trust or stop the same, There cannot be any interference in the internal affairs of any association or agency neither can one question their decision, Theallegations of the Plaintiffs are thus baseless and absurd, Similarl far as AVA is concemed, it is a registered association and is running independently. It is also registered under Foreign Contributions Regulations Act (FCRA) since the year 1985 and has been receiving donations from various donors on its own merits, His further absolutely absurd and baseless to allege and thus denied in toto that AVA is now the funding of Mukti Pratishthan. The applicany plaintiff be put to strict proof of the same, On the contrary, AVA has never ever been i funding agency to the trust. Funding to Mukti pratishthan has been stopped by the donor agencies due to the repeated complains by the PlaintisiS and Swami Agnivesh.lt is further wrong, false and baseless ¢ and thus denied thar AVA reement. The financially managing the said trust in terms of some a applicanvplaintift may be put to strict proof of the same. In fact, no agreement was ever executed between AVA and Mukti Pratishthan for either financially managing or running the trust and therefore such superfluous and non- existent agreement does not arise at all, Rest Of the contents of this para are totally denied as being baseless, frivolous and meritless. Para 4: Entire contents of 4 of the application are wre: frivolous and denied in 1 ed that there mismanagement in AVA or any misappropriation of funds of the society by Shri Bhuwan Ribhu Satyarthi or by anyone of the answering Defendants. The applicany plaintitY is required to be put to strict proof of the same. It is humbly stated that resent suit has been filed under section 92 CPC by the plaimtitis against the S ettlor trustees of the trust, i., Mukti Pratishthan and they can not enlarge the scope and applicability of Sec. 92 CPC by illegally uying to include the names of other associations in which they are neither members, offive bearers or ustees and/ or initiate inquiry. The present application filed by the applicant is a clear case of abusing the process of court and of law. The applicant cannot interfere into the internal affairs’) management of another organisation,im ¢ Entire contents of para 3 of the application are wrong, frivolous and denied except the fact that the defendant no. 1 owns one residential DDA flat wherein he lives with his family for shelter, It i further wrong and denied that AVA and Mukti Pratishthan and ot created trusts are interlinked. : REPLY TO PRAYER CLAUS! The prayer clause in the application is highly misconceived and baseless and thus the applicant’ plaintitY is not entitled to any relief whatsoever. In view of the facts and circumstances stated in the above reply by the answering defendents, the application being meritless and frivolous is liable to be di ssed with heavy. cost: ivolous is liable to be dismissed with oy p “ : XO ot RB ee wor DELHI DEFENDANT NO. 1 AND 2 DATED ~ 21.08.2008 THROUGH f Tihs. : COUNSEL ~~ >IN THE COURT OF SHRI P.K.JAIN, A.D.J., DELHI SUIT NO.32/1997 IN THE MATTER OF. SHRI SHEOTA SINGH & ORS PLAINTIFFS VERSUS. SHRI KAILASH SATYARTHI & ANR. DEFENDANTS, AFFIDAVIT 1, Kailash Satyarthi, Son of Late Ramprasad, aged about 54 years, Ro 73, Aravali Apartments, Kalkaji, New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under: |. That I am the Defendant no.1 in the above case and well conversant with the facts of the case and thus competent to swear this affidavit, 2. That I have read and understood the contents of the accompanying reply to the application U/s 151 CPC filed by the Plaintiff No.1 drafted by my counsel upon my instructions and say that the same are true and correct, The contents may kindly be read as part of this affidavit and the same are not being repeated herein for the sake of ~~ wae Deponent brevity Yerifleation: Verified at Delhi on this 2!’ day of August, 2008 that the contents of the above affidavit in paras | and 2 are true and correct, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom, “hes DeponentIN THE COURT OF SH! RIP.KJAIN, A.D.J., DELHI SUIT NO.32/1997 INTHE MATTER O} IN THE MATTER OF: SHRI SHEOTAJ SINGH & ORS VERSUS. SHRI KAILASH SATYARTHI & ANR. AFFIDAVIT 1, Sumedha Kailash , Wife of Shri Ki years, R/o 73, Aravali Apartments, solemnly affirm and state as under: 1, That T am the Defendant no. conversant with the facts of the case affidavit. 2. That I have read and understood # reply to the application drafted by my counsel upon my inst true and correct. The affidavit and the same are né brevity wv Verified at Delhi on this 2) contents of the above affidavit in pare part of it is false and nothing mat . PLAINTIFFS, .DEFENDANTS, ailash Satyarthi, aged about 53 Kalkaji, New Delhi, do hereby in the above case and well and thus competent to swear this he contents of the accompanying U/s 151 CPC filed by the Plaintiff No.! uuctions and say that the same are kindly be read as part of this ‘ot being repeated herein for the sake of Cone’ oe Deporent day of August, 2008 that the ‘as 1 and 2 are true and correct, no | has been concealed therefrom. Spec eee