Reply to Application under order 7 Rule 11 CPC

 

Reply to Application under order 7 Rule 11 CPC 

In the name of ALLAH, the most beneficent, the most merciful

 IN THE COURT OF ____________, CIVIL JUDGE RAWLAPINDI

Mst. ______

Versus

______

 

SUIT FOR SEPARATE POSSESSION THROUGH PARTITION

 

                                             

APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11 CPC

 

WRITTEN REPLY ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT/ PLAINTIFF

 

 

Respectfully Sheweth:

 

 

PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:

 

 

1.            That the application in hand was addressed to the Court of Civil Judge (EAST) Islamabad, therefore this Honourable court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter.

 

2.            That the instant application has been filed to linger on the matter which would result in wastage the precious time of this Honourable Court.

 

3.            That in fact, the above titled case was fixed for written statement on behalf of applicant/ defendant but the applicant/ defendant instead of filing written statement, filed the instant application.

 

4.            That the applicant/ defendant has already been fined for as sum of Rs. 1,000/- which has not been deposited yet. In the above titled suit, the ex -parte proceedings were initiated against the applicant/ respondent but later on, the applicant/ defendant appeared before the court and started trying to linger on the matter and till today no written statement has been filed on his behalf.

 

5.            That in the above titled suit, in an application, the contempt proceedings has also been initiated against the applicant/ defendant but in this contempt proceedings,  the applicant/ defendant has not submitted any reply.

 

On facts:

 

1.            Para No. 1 relates to the court proceedings, therefore no need for reply.

2.            Para No. 2 is denied.

3.           Para No. 3 is not correct. Although, some of part of suit property is of agricultural nature but the other part comes within the ABADI DEHH and also  contempt application is also pending before the court against the applicant/ defendant for  raising construction over the suit property. Some construction has been done by applicant / defendant and more construction is also being made by him. This honorable court has full jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter.  Rest of para is denied.

 

4.            Para No. 4 is denied. All the necessary parties were impleaded in the above titled suit

 

5.            The instant suit is of partition where prescribed court fee has been affixed by the respondent/ plaintiff. Rest of para is denied.

 

6.            In reply to para No. 6 it is stated that suit of the respondent/ plaintiff is competent and filed against the applicant  defendant who is real brother of respondent / plaintiff and want to deprive the respondent/ plaintiff from her legal right/ share in property.

 

PRAYER:

In view of above, it is most humbly prayed that as the applicant is false and frivolous, therefore the same be rejected with heavy costs in the interest of justice.

Any other relief which this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper, may also be awarded to the respondent / plaintiff.

 

Respondent / plaintiff

Through

 

 

Advocate High Court