IN THE COURT OF MS NAMITA AGGARWAL: ARC, TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI

SUIT : RC/ARC/151 /14

Naval Kishore & ors. …. Petitioners

Versus

Jagdish Lal ….Respondent

NDOH : 2/06/2015

REPLY/ OBJECTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS TO THE DOCUMENTS

FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS ON 16-3-2015.

Most Respectfully Showeth :-

That the counsel for defendant filed certain documents without first obtaining Leave
of this Hon’ble Court on 16/03/2015, which ought not be taken on record and are
liable to be returned back, inter alia, for the following reasons:

1. That in the above case, the trial has been completed and the the above noted
matter is now listed for final arguments.
2. That the Respondent has not taken the leave of this Hon’ble Court as required
under Order 8 of CPC and the stage for filing documents had already elapsed.

3. That even otherwise, the respondent has nowhere pleaded about the existence of
any such documents in its pleadings and the evidence and the documents being
filed at this stage are mere after thought and the acceptance thereof at this stage
shall seriously prejudice the Petitioner and the hence same is not liable to be
considered by this Hon’ble court.

4. That the No objection certificate alleged to have been executed by Shri Tirlok
Chand does not bear his signature, nor was he ever authorised by any of the other
Co owners to execute the same. The said document now filed by the respondent
 was never pleaded by the Respondent. It is forged and fabricated. Hence the
same is not liable to be considered by this Hon’ble court.

5. That the Respondents are guilty of delay and laches and have not disclosed any
reasons for not filing the said documents earlier. No reasons have been given why
they were prevented by pleading the same and filing the same earlier.

6. That the respondent is debarred from filing theses documents in view of the bar
contained in Order 8 Rule 1A (3) of CPC.

In view of the above it is stated that the documents filed by the defendant are
liable to be returned to the Respondent and should not be taken and kept on
records of this Hon’ble Court.
It is prayed accordingly.

Filed by :-
DELHI

DATED Petitioner

Through

RICHA JINDAL
ADVOCATE
IN THE COURT OF MS NAMITA AGGARWAL: ARC, TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI

SUIT : RC/ARC/151 /14

Naval Kishore & ors. …. Petitioners

Versus

Jagdish Lal ….Respondent

APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER U/S ORDER 12 RULE 6 CPC AGAINST

THE DEFENDANT FOR GRANTINF DECREE IN FAVAOUR OF PETITIONER ON
ADMISSION

Most respectfully showeth :

1. That the Petitioner have filed the above said petition for eviction of tenant against
the respondent under section 14 (1) (a) and (b) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.

2. That it is respectfully submitted that accordingly notice was issued and the
respondent had filed written statement on 13/10/2014.

3. That the respondent categorically admitted in reply to para 18 (a) 1 of the written
statement that he paid the rent upto 11.02.2013 only and thereafter he did not
took any step to pay the rent till date.

4. That it is further submitted that in reply to para 18 (a) 2 of the written statement
that he had entered into partnership business and parted the possession of
rented premises completely without obtaining the permission of the petitioner as
the respondent had not filed any document with regard to approval obtained by
the respondent from the petitioner, which is an offence under section 14 (4) of
DRC Act.

Under these circumstances, the applicant/Petitioner respectfully submits

and prays that the Hon’ble Judge may pass a decree for eviction and thereby
direct the respondent to vacate the rented premises and hand over the vacant
and peaceful possession to the petitioner in the interest of justice by this Hon’ble
court and the complaint against the petitioners, in the interest of justice.

Filed by

Applicant/Respondent

Through

counsel