 |
| Written Reply to Application for Setting Aside Ex-Parte Judgment and Decree |
In the name of ALLAH, the most beneficent, the most
merciful
IN THE COURT OF MR.
_______________LEARNED ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE
Nabeel
Ahmed Raja Khan Vs Mehmood Alam Gujar Butt
(Suit
for Recovery under Order 37 CPC)
APPLICATION
FOR SETTING ASIDE EX PARTE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20-10-2016 ON BEHALF OF
DEFENDANT
WRITTEN
REPLY ON BEHALF OF DECREE HOLDER (PLAINTIFF)
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:-
1. That
the application under reply is hopelessly time barred.
2.
That the application has been
filed without seeking condonation of delay, therefore the period of said delay
cannot be entertained as right of applicant.
3.
That the applicant has
concealed material facts regarding no knowledge of said suit & decree,
therefore the application is not entertain able.
ON MERIT:-
1.
Para 1 is correct to the
extent of judgment dated 20-10-2016. Rest of the Para is not correct as stated,
hence denied.
2.
Para 2 is correct and
admitted.
3.
Para 3 is incorrect and
denied. The applicant was well aware about the said suit which is evident from
order sheet dated 21-07-2016 wherein the service of summon through father of
applicant was reported, therefore the plea of applicant for having no knowledge
of the suit is false, baseless and therefore cannot be entertained. Further the
applicant contested criminal case FIR No: 20233 of 2015 which was lodged much
prior to filing of the suit, therefore the plea of applicant is baseless.
4.
Para 4 is false, baseless
& incorrect, therefore denied. It was applicant who avoided to appear and
contest the case.
5.
Para 5 is incorrect and
denied. Reply at
6.
Para 6 is incorrect and
denied. The applicant is a habitual criminal who after lodging of above stated
FIR, applied for post arrest bail and after obtaining interim used to remain
absent on next date and similarly after rejection of bail due to non
prosecution, used to file a fresh one for again obtaining interim bail. It is
further added that same practice repeated for more than five times and
thereafter he was arrested.
7.
Para 7 is false, incorrect
therefore denied. The reply at Para 3 & 6 is reiterated here.
8.
Para 8 is incorrect and
denied. Since the applicant is a habitual criminal person who used to defraud
innocent people, therefore in case of acceptance of this application, it would
be respondent/plaintiff who shall suffer irreparable loss.
9.
Para 9 is not correct as
stated, hence denied. The applicant cannot hide behind the ground of
technicalities.
PRAYER:
In
view of above, it is respectfully prayed that the application under reply may
kindly be dismissed in the interest of justice.
Respondent/Plaintiff
(Decree Holder)
Through
Counsel
Advocate
High Court
 |
| Download Written Reply to Application for Setting Aside Ex-Parte Judgment and Decree |