IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
D.O.H.: Date of hearing
REJOINDER / REPLICATION TO THE WRITTEN STATEMENT / REPLY FILED BY RESPONDENTS NO. 2 & 3 TO THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER.
REJOINDER / REPLICATION TO THE WRITTEN STATEMENT / REPLY FILED BY RESPONDENTS NO. 2 & 3 TO THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
REPLY TO THE PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:-
1.That the contents of paragraph 1 of the preliminary objections are wrong and incorrect and are hence denied. It is denied that on the night between Date (night between) and Date (night between) at about Time of night, the petitioner came to the residence of respondents no. 2 and 3 and left the minor Name of minor girl child there, stating that he had been called by his brother, and that since then the minor Name of minor girl child has been in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3 and the petitioner has not cared for her welfare. It is further denied that the petitioner did not even wish the minor Name of minor girl child on her birthday and did not provide her with any clothes, books or toys since she has been in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3. It is also denied that the petitioner has shown no concern whatsoever for the studies and health of the minor Name of minor girl child since she has been in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3. The minor Name of minor girl child is at present studying in Name of minor's school, where she was got admitted by respondents no. 2 and 3, and the expenses of her admission were borne by respondents no. 2 and 3. It is denied that the minor Name of minor girl child has great love and affection for respondents no. 2 and 3, and that respondents no. 2 and 3 have great love and affection for the minor Name of minor girl child. It is further denied that the petitioner is living alone in Petitioner's city of residence and that it would not be in the interest and welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child to give her custody to the petitioner and to change her custody from respondents no. 2 and 3. It is further denied that, in the welfare of the minor, it is just and proper that the present petition filed by the petitioner be dismissed with costs.
2.That the contents of paragraph 2 of the preliminary objections are wrong and incorrect and are hence denied. It is denied that the petitioner is in the habit of telling lies. The statement on oath of the petitioner was recorded in the Court of the Ld. ASJ on Date of petitioner's statement on oath, in which the petitioner stated that he had filed a petition for the custody of his minor daughter before the competent court. It is further denied that the petitioner, intentionally and with mala fide intention, made a false statement on oath before the Hon'ble Ld. ASJ to the effect that no petition for the custody of the minor filed by the petitioner was pending on Date of alleged false statement. It is further denied that the petition under Section 25 of the Guardianship Act was filed by the petitioner after Date of filing custody petition. It is correct that the petitioner has also filed a divorce petition under Section 13 of the HMA Act against respondent no. 1, which is pending in this Hon'ble Court. It is denied that the petitioner was living in Petitioner's city of residence when the divorce petition was filed. It is correct that the petitioner has, in the present case, filed a copy of the application addressed to the SHO, which is purported to have been received at PS Police station on Date of receipt at police station, with DD no. 49B mentioned therein. It is denied that it would be against the interest and welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child to grant custody to the petitioner, who allegedly has no respect for truth. The rest of the contents are denied.
3.That the contents of paragraph 3 of the preliminary objections are wrong and incorrect and are hence denied. It is denied that the petitioner, in collusion with the police, falsely implicated his wife, respondent no. 1, in a false criminal case of murder and got her arrested in collusion with the police. It is further denied that respondent no. 1 is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the criminal case. It is also denied that the petitioner is a very cunning person and is very close and friendly with the young lady Name of young lady allegedly involved, whom he wants to marry. It is further denied that the petitioner generally talks with Name of young lady allegedly involved on the telephone, generally exchanges messages with her on the telephone, and also generally exchanges greetings with her on the telephone. The rest of the contents are a matter of record and need no reply. It is denied that the present petition has been filed by the petitioner with mala fide intention, that it is meritless, and that it is liable to be dismissed.
4.That the contents of paragraph 4 of the preliminary objections are wrong and incorrect and are hence denied. It is denied that, after consultation and with mala fide intention, the petitioner filed this petition after Date of filing petition, and that by making a false statement on Date of alleged false statement on oath the petitioner committed perjury and is liable to be prosecuted for intentionally giving a false statement on oath before the Ld. ASJ. It is further denied that the petitioner is not a fit person to whom the custody of the minor may be given from the custody of respondents no. 2 and 3, for the welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is further denied that it is very necessary for the minor to remain in the custody of a female, and that respondent no. 3, Mrs. Respondent no.3's name (maternal grandmother), the maternal grandmother of the minor Name of minor girl child, with whom she has been living since Date since minor living with grandmother, should retain her custody. It is also denied that the petitioner is living in Petitioner's city of residence and that it would not be in the interest of the minor to change her place of education / study when she is already receiving education in Delhi.
5.That the contents of paragraph 5 of the preliminary objections are wrong and incorrect and are hence denied. It is denied that, since the minor has been in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3, the petitioner has never made any attempt to look after the welfare and interest of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is further denied that, after making a false statement on oath on Date of alleged false statement on oath before the Ld. ASJ, and after consultation and with mala fide intention, the petitioner has filed the present petition. It is also denied that the petitioner has not given any valid and proper reason for changing the care and custody of the minor from respondents no. 2 and 3 to the petitioner. It is denied that the upbringing of the minor Name of minor girl child is being properly looked after by respondents no. 2 and 3, and that the petitioner, who is living alone, would not be in a position to provide a comfortable living for the minor child Name of minor girl child, and that the minor Name of minor girl child, having lived with respondents no. 2 and 3 since her infancy, has developed an emotional bond with them. It is further denied that the petitioner intends to marry Name of young lady allegedly involved, and it is stated that respondents no. 2 and 3 have sufficient means to look after the welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is also denied that the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child should not be changed until the person in whose custody the minor is, is found to be unfit to look after her welfare. It is denied that the petitioner, who is in service with Petitioner's employer and who does not have, as a member of his joint family, any female member living with him at present, has a petition whose dismissal is required in the interest and welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child.
6.That the contents of paragraph 6 of the preliminary objections are wrong and incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that after the illegal arrest of respondent no. 1 on Date of arrest of respondent no.1, the petitioner, instead of taking care of the breast-feeding child Name of minor girl child, came to the house of respondents no. 2 and 3 in the night between Date (night between) at about Time of night and left the minor child Name of minor girl child with respondents no. 2 and 3 on the pretext that he (the petitioner) was being called by his brother, and that since then the minor child Name of minor girl child has been under the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3. It is further denied that stability and consistency in the affairs and routines of the child are of utmost importance, and that therefore the child should be allowed to continue under the care and custody of her maternal grandparents (respondents no. 2 and 3) and should not be disturbed or interfered with, keeping in view the best interest and welfare of the minor child Name of minor girl child. The rest of the contents are denied.
REJOINDER ON MERITS:-
1.That the contents of paragraph 1 of the written statement/reply are wrong and incorrect, are reiterated and denied. It is denied that the petitioner came to the house of respondents no. 2 and 3 on Date petitioner left minor at grandparents and left the minor Name of minor girl child with respondents no. 2 and 3, when the minor child Name of minor girl child was at the breast-feeding stage, on the pretext that he was being called by his brother. It is further denied that since Date since minor in grandparents' custody the minor child Name of minor girl child has been under the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3, and that since then her proper care and welfare have been looked after by respondents no. 2 and 3. It is also denied that the minor Name of minor girl child has now been admitted by respondents no. 2 and 3 in a reputed school namely Name of minor's school and that she is extremely happy in the said school. It is further denied that the girl child is now about 40 months old and that her maternal grandmother and maternal grandfather are looking after her interest and welfare. It is further denied that for about 20 months since Start date of petitioner's indifference, the petitioner remained totally indifferent to the welfare and interest of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is also denied that on Date of alleged false statement in ASJ court the petitioner intentionally made a false statement in the Court of Court before which the alleged false statement was made that he had filed a petition for the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is also denied that, in fact, on Date of alleged false statement in ASJ court no petition filed by the petitioner regarding the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child was pending in any court. It is also denied that after Date after which petition filed the petitioner, with mala fide intention and in consultation with others, filed the present petition for custody in a well-planned manner after Date after which petition filed. It is further denied that on Date minor was with respondent no.1 and on Date minor was with respondent no.1, the minor Name of minor girl child was in the care and custody of respondent no. 1 at the residence of her mother. It is further denied that when the petition under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act was filed by the petitioner, the age of Name of minor girl child was about Age of minor (years) and Age of minor (months). It is further denied that the petitioner has falsely stated in this paragraph that the child had attained the age of Age of minor (years) and Age of minor (months).
It is denied that since Date since minor in grandparents' custody the minor Name of minor girl child has been in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3. It is further denied that since then the petitioner has not cared to look after the welfare and interest of the minor Name of minor girl child and that respondent no. 1 is in custody in a false case. It is also denied that the petitioner and the police are in collusion and that they have, in a planned manner, falsely implicated respondent no. 1 in the criminal case. It is further denied that the petitioner does not have any other family members. The rest of the contents are wrong and denied.
It is denied that the petitioner, his brother or his sister-in-law (bhabhi) have not attempted to meet and talk with the minor Name of minor girl child since the minor child came to be in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3. It is further denied that the petitioner has filed this petition without any legal justification, with mala fide intention and in disregard of the welfare and interest of the minor. It is also denied that, the minor Name of minor girl child being in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3 since Date since minor in grandparents' custody, the petitioner has approached this Hon'ble Court with mala fide intention.
It is further denied that the petitioner has no respect for truth or oath, and that the family of the petitioner consists of the petitioner, his wife and his minor daughter Name of minor girl child, who is now in the custody of the parents of respondent no. 1. It is further denied that the petitioner has filed a knowingly false affidavit, has committed perjury and has made knowingly false averments on material points in his petition. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, as the same are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
2.That the contents of paragraph 2 of the written statement/reply are wrong and incorrect, are reiterated and denied. It is denied that the petitioner has been working, employed and residing at Petitioner's place of employment/residence since Year petitioner started working there and that no female is living with the petitioner at Petitioner's place of employment/residence. It is further denied that, the minor Name of minor girl child being a female/girl child of about 3 years and 4 months of age at present, keeping in view the interest and welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child, it would not be just and proper to give the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child to the petitioner. It is also denied that in the custody of the petitioner the upbringing of the minor Name of minor girl child will not be proper and in the interest of the minor. The rest of the contents are wrong and denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, as the same are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
3.That the contents of paragraph 3 of the written statement/reply are wrong and incorrect, are reiterated and denied. It is denied that the contents of paragraph 3 of the petition show that the intention of the petitioner is to keep the minor Name of minor girl child at City where petitioner is employed, where he is employed with Employer company name and where the office of Employer company name is situated at City where company office is situated. It is further denied that the welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child requires that she should continue in the care and custody of her maternal grandparents at City where the maternal grandparents reside. It is further denied that before the order dated Date of court order the petitioner had not taken any interest in the welfare of the minor and had never made any request to the respondents to meet the minor child. The contents of the rest of the paragraph are denied.
It is further denied that, the minor child already studying at City where the maternal grandparents reside, it would be against her interest to shift her for her studies to City of proposed study shift. It is further denied that it is always desirable that the studies of the minor should be continuous and at the same place. It is also denied that the studies and upbringing of the minor are continuing in a proper and congenial atmosphere at City where the maternal grandparents reside in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, as the same are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
4.That the contents of paragraph 4 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that respondent No. 1, the mother of the minor, has been falsely implicated in a murder case by the petitioner in collusion with the police in a well-planned manner, and that she is presently in judicial custody. It is further denied that the mother-in-law of respondent No. 1 was murdered by an unknown person on Date of mother-in-law's murder, and that in the said incident respondent No. 1 also sustained injuries for which she was medically examined. It is further denied that, in the court of Sh. V.K. Yadav, ASJ, on Date of petitioner's admission in ASJ court, it was admitted that the relations between respondent No. 1 and her mother-in-law were normal.
It is further denied that the minor child is being very well looked after by respondents No. 2 and 3, that she is studying in a reputed school, and that she is living happily with respondents No. 2 and 3. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
5.That the contents of paragraph 5 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that the respondents have never used abusive language or caused any violence. It is further denied that the petitioner has intentionally made false and concocted charges with a malafide intention. It is also denied that it is in the interest and welfare of the minor that she should continue in the care and custody of her maternal grandparents. It is further denied that the petitioner is living alone or separately at Petitioner's place of residence. It is further denied that the elder brother of the petitioner is living separately in New Delhi along with his wife and children. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
6.That the contents of paragraph 6 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that the petitioner is close and friendly with one Name of young lady allegedly involved. It is further denied that the petitioner intends to marry the said Name of young lady allegedly involved. It is also denied that the divorce petition has been filed by the petitioner with a malafide intention and that it is without merit. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
7.That the contents of paragraph 7 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that the petitioner has falsely stated any matter regarding his transfer to Delhi. It is further denied that the petitioner has not filed any order of his employer evidencing his transfer to Delhi, or any copy of any request made by him to his employer for such transfer. It is also denied that the petitioner left Delhi in Year petitioner left Delhi and proceeded to City petitioner moved to for work and has been working there since. It is further denied that the petitioner has no intention of seeking a transfer to City of intended transfer.
It is further denied that the house of the petitioner and the house of his brother are separate and situated at different places. It is also denied that the petitioner holds no ownership in the house in which his brother is residing, and that his brother holds no ownership in the house owned by the petitioner in Delhi. It is further denied that the family of respondents No. 2 and 3 is very reputed, and it is denied that it is not in the interest and welfare of the minor that she be given into the custody of the petitioner. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
8.That the contents of paragraph 8 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that the minor is in the care and custody of respondents No. 2 and 3 voluntarily, when it was the petitioner himself who left the minor in their care and custody. It is further denied that the petitioner is feeling anguish, disappointment or frustration on account of the acts, attitude and conduct of the respondents. It is also denied that the petitioner has made false and concocted averments with a malafide intention. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
9.That the contents of paragraph 9 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
10.That the contents of paragraph 10 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that respondents No. 2 and 3 are fit persons to take care of the minor Name of minor girl child, it being noted that respondent No. 1 is about 52 years of age and respondent No. 2 is 50 years of age. It is further denied that respondents No. 2 and 3 have been taking proper care of the minor Name of minor girl child since Date since grandparents caring for minor. From the manner in which the averments have been made in this paragraph, it is evident that the petitioner seeks to create confusion and has intentionally made false, confusing and vague averments. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
11.That the contents of paragraph 11 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that there is no separation between the parties; the petitioner has made false and confusing averments with a malafide intention. It is further denied that the petitioner himself left the minor Name of minor girl child at the residence of respondents No. 2 and 3. It is also denied that the petitioner wishes to marry Name of young lady allegedly involved, who is said to be the sister of his sister-in-law (Bhabhi) and with whom he is alleged to be close and friendly. It is further denied that the petitioner is regularly in touch with Name of young lady allegedly involved, or that he regularly speaks with her over the telephone. The remaining contents are wrong and are denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
12.That the contents of paragraph 12 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that the petitioner is not interested in maintaining the child or in taking proper care of her. It is further denied that the petitioner is continuously neglecting the minor Name of minor girl child. It is also denied that the minor Name of minor girl child is already receiving proper education and is being properly brought up in a good and congenial atmosphere in the care and custody of respondents No. 2 and 3. It is further denied that the petitioner is in the habit of consuming liquor, that he is living alone at Petitioner's city of residence, and that Petitioner's city of residence is more than 650 kilometres from Delhi. It is further denied that respondents No. 2 and 3 are already providing the minor Name of minor girl child all the amenities necessary for her proper upbringing and development, and that she is being brought up in a good and congenial atmosphere and culture. It is also denied that the petitioner has no family member residing with him at City where petitioner is working, where he is employed. It is further denied that the elder brother of the petitioner has been living separately along with his wife and two children since long. It is also denied that the addresses of the petitioner, his brother and his sister-in-law (Bhabhi) are different, and that the petitioner holds a driving licence, Aadhaar card and election identity card bearing an address other than that of his brother and sister-in-law (Bhabhi). It is also denied that it would be against the welfare and interest of the minor Name of minor girl child to hand over her custody to the petitioner. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
REJOINDER / REPLICATION TO WRITTEN STATEMENT
(Petition under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890)
13.That the contents of paragraph 13 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that the petitioner has been residing at Petitioner's city of residence since Year petitioner living there since and that since Date/year petitioner never approached he never approached the respondents to see or meet the minor Name of minor girl child. It is further denied that, the minor child being aged about three years and four months, it would be against the welfare and interest of the minor child to grant her custody to the petitioner. It is also denied that the petitioner has not referred to the alleged terms which the respondents seek to dictate to him, or that it would be against the welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child to hand over her custody to the petitioner. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, as they are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
14.That the contents of paragraph 14 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that it would be against the interest and welfare of the minor child to grant her custody to the petitioner, or that the petitioner is an unfit person to have the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child. The rest of the contentions are wrong and denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, as they are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
15.That the contents of paragraph 15 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that respondent no. 1 has been falsely implicated in the case as a result of a criminal conspiracy of the petitioner and police officials, or that she has been falsely implicated due to collusion between the petitioner and the police officials in a well-planned manner. It is further denied that the petitioner is closely acquainted with or friendly with Name of young lady allegedly involved. It is also denied that the petitioner wishes to marry Name of young lady allegedly involved, or that the petitioner has any strong motive to falsely implicate respondent no. 1 in collusion with the police in the criminal case. It is also denied that the petitioner has no legal right, in the circumstances of this case, to obtain the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is further denied that the petitioner has not cited any provision of law in support of his claim or legal position, and it is further denied that the petitioner seeks to create confusion regarding the legal position. It is further denied that it is in the best interest and welfare of the minor that her custody should continue with respondents no. 2 and 3, with whom the minor has been living continuously since Date since minor living with grandparents. It is also denied that the interest and welfare of the minor child would be adversely affected if her custody is granted to the petitioner. The rest of the contents are wrong and denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, as they are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
16.That the contents of paragraph 16 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that the minor child, being a girl child of about three years and four months of age, is receiving proper education in a good atmosphere and proper culture. It is further denied that the conduct of the petitioner is such that he is an unfit person to have the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is further denied that the minor Name of minor girl child is receiving education in a proper atmosphere and under the care and affection of respondents no. 2 and 3. It is also denied that the petitioner is an unfit person to obtain the custody of the minor from the custody of respondents no. 2 and 3. It is further denied that the minor Name of minor girl child is enjoying proper comforts and is being provided all facilities and amenities for her physical and mental needs by respondents no. 2 and 3. It is further denied that the minor Name of minor girl child is being raised in a good atmosphere and proper culture at the residence of respondents no. 2 and 3, or that she is very happy and comfortable in their care and custody. It is also denied that the minor Name of minor girl child is receiving proper love and affection in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3, or that she enjoys the love and affection of her maternal grandparents and has, on that account, become very emotionally attached to respondents no. 2 and 3. It is further denied that the maternal grandparents of the minor Name of minor girl child are very emotionally attached to her, or that the minor Name of minor girl child is receiving proper education and proper development in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3. It is further denied that the maternal grandparents of the minor Name of minor girl child are providing all facilities for her physical needs and for her proper development and welfare. The rest of the contents are wrong and denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, as they are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
17.That the contents of paragraph 17 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that the minor Name of minor girl child has been living in the care and custody of respondents no. 2 and 3 since Date since minor in grandparents' custody. It is further denied that the petition is meritless, that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief claimed, and that the petition is liable to be dismissed with special costs to the respondents. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, as they are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
That the prayer clause of the written statement/reply is absolutely wrong and is specifically denied. The respondents are not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed therein.
That any allegation made in the written statement/reply which has not been specifically denied herein shall be deemed to be absolutely wrong and specifically denied, and the absence of a specific denial shall not be construed as an admission on the part of the petitioner.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant the relief in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents as prayed in the rejoinder, in the interest of justice, equity and having regard to the circumstances of the case.
Pass such further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.
It is prayed accordingly.
PETITIONER
Place of filingTHROUGH
DATED: Date of signing
ADVOCATE
Advocate's address,
Advocate's address.
IN THE COURT OF Name and address of the court
C.C./Complaint case number/1/2015.
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Smt. Deponent's name (grandmother), W/o Sh. Deponent's husband's name, R/o Deponent's address, who do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1.That I am the complainant in the above-mentioned case and am well conversant with the facts of the case, and am competent to swear the present affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying rejoinder to the reply have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the contents thereof have been duly read over and explained to me, which I have fully understood. Having understood the contents thereof, I hereby state that the facts stated therein are true and correct to my knowledge and belief.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at Place of verification on this Date of signing that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge and belief, nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
3.The facts stated therein may kindly be read as part and parcel of the present Affidavit as well, since the contents thereof have not been reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Date of verification day of August, 2016, that the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
RESPONDENT NO.1
IN THE COURT OF MS. POONAM A. BAMBA; PRINCIPAL JUDGE; SOUTH DISTRICT, FAMILY COURT, NEW DELHI.
G. PETITION NO. Guardianship petition number/2015.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
D.O.H.: Date of hearing
REJOINDER / REPLICATION TO THE WS/REPLY FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
REPLY TO THE PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:-
1.That the contents of paragraph 1 of the preliminary objections are wrong and incorrect, and are therefore denied. It is denied that it will not be in the welfare and interest of the minor Name of minor girl child to give her into the custody of the petitioner. It is further denied that the petitioner has been living alone in City in Andhra Pradesh where petitioner lives (Andhra Pradesh) for the last more than two years and that no female is living with him. It is also denied that if the minor is given into the custody of the petitioner, it will cause a dislocation of her studies and will not be in the interest and welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is further denied that the minor Name of minor girl child is growing up in good surroundings and in a proper and good culture while in the care and custody of her maternal parents. It is further denied that on Date minor was about one year old Kumari Name of minor girl child was about one year old, and that since then she has continuously been in the care and custody of her maternal grandparents, with whom she shares an emotional bond. It is also denied that the petitioner intends to marry Name of young lady allegedly involved, with whom he has a close relationship and friendship and with whom he is continuously in telephonic talks and conversation.
It is further denied that in the event of the care and custody of the minor Name of minor girl child being changed as prayed for by the petitioner, it would be against the interest and welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child, who is comfortably and happily living and studying in the care and custody of her maternal grandparents.
2.That the contents of paragraph 2 of the preliminary objections are wrong and incorrect, and are therefore denied. It is denied that the petitioner, in collusion with the police, has falsely implicated the respondent no.1 in a false criminal case of murder and has got her arrested in collusion with the police. It is further denied that the respondent no.1 is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the criminal case. It is also denied that the petitioner is a very cunning person and is very close and friendly with the young lady Name of young lady allegedly involved, whom he wants to marry. It is further denied that the petitioner generally talks with Name of young lady allegedly involved on telephone, that the petitioner generally exchanges messages with Name of young lady allegedly involved on telephone, and that the petitioner generally also exchanges greetings with Name of young lady allegedly involved on telephone. The rest of the contents are a matter of record and need no reply. It is denied that this petition has been filed by the petitioner with malafide intention, that it is meritless, and that it is liable to be dismissed.
REJOINDER ON MERITS:-
1.That the contents of paragraph 1 of the WS/reply are wrong and incorrect, and are therefore denied, while the contents of the corresponding paragraphs of the petition are reiterated. It is denied that the petitioner, on Date petitioner left minor at grandparents at about 1 a.m., came to the house of respondents no.2 and 3 and left the minor Name of minor girl child with respondents no.2 and 3, when the minor child Name of minor girl child was at the stage of breast-feeding, at about 1 p.m., on the pretext that he was being called by his brother. It is further denied that since Date since minor in grandparents' custody the minor child Name of minor girl child has been under the care and custody of respondents no.2 and 3, and that since then respondents no.2 and 3 have been looking after the proper care and welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is also denied that the minor Name of minor girl child has now been admitted by respondents no.2 and 3 into a reputed school namely Name of minor's school, and that she is extremely happy in the said school. It is further denied that the girl child is now about 40 months old and that her maternal grandmother and maternal grandfather are looking after her interest and welfare. It is further denied that for about 20 months since Start date of petitioner's indifference, the petitioner remained totally indifferent to the welfare and interest of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is also denied that on Date of alleged false statement in ASJ court the petitioner intentionally made a false statement in the Court of Sh. V.K. Yadav, ASJ, Delhi, that he had filed the petition for the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is also denied that, in fact, on Date of alleged false statement in ASJ court no petition filed by the petitioner regarding the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child was pending in any court. It is also denied that after Date after which petition filed, with malafide intention and in consultation with others, the petitioner filed the present petition for custody in a well-planned manner after Date after which petition filed. It is further denied that on Date minor was with respondent no.1 and on Date minor was with respondent no.1, the minor Name of minor girl child was in the care and custody of respondent no.1 at the residence of her mother. It is further denied that when the petition under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act was filed by the petitioner, the age of Name of minor girl child was about 2 years and 9 months. It is further denied that the petitioner has falsely stated in this paragraph that the child had attained the age of two years and six months when this petition was filed at Court/city where petition filed.
It is denied that since Date since minor in grandparents' custody the minor Name of minor girl child has been in the care and custody of respondents no.2 and 3. It is further denied that since then the petitioner has not cared to look after the welfare and interest of the minor Name of minor girl child, and that respondent no.1 is in custody in a false case. It is also denied that the petitioner and the police are in collusion and that they have, in a planned manner, falsely implicated respondent no.1 in the criminal case. It is further denied that the petitioner does not have any other family members in his family except respondent no.1, against whom the petitioner has filed a petition for divorce which is pending. The rest of the contents are wrong and are denied.
It is denied that the petitioner, or his brother, or his bhabhi have not attempted to meet and talk with the minor Name of minor girl child since the minor child has been in the care and custody of respondents no.2 and 3. It is further denied that the petitioner has filed this petition without any legal justification and with malafide intention, ignoring the welfare and interest of the minor. It is also denied that, since the minor Name of minor girl child has been in the care and custody of respondents no.2 and 3 since Date since minor in grandparents' custody, the petitioner has approached this Hon'ble Court with malafide intention.
It is further denied that the petitioner has no respect for truth and oath, and that the family of the petitioner consists of the petitioner, his wife and his minor daughter Name of minor girl child, who is now in the custody of the parents of respondent no.1. It is further denied that the petitioner has filed an intentionally false affidavit, has committed perjury, and has made intentionally false averments on material points in his petition. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraphs of the petition are reiterated as true and correct and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, as the same are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
2.That the contents of paragraph 2 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that the petitioner is working and employed, and residing, at Petitioner's place of employment/residence since Year petitioner started working there, and that no female is living with the petitioner at Petitioner's place of employment/residence. It is further denied that, keeping in view the interest and welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child, who is a female/girl child of about 3 years and 4 months of age at present, it would not be just and proper to grant the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child to the petitioner. It is also denied that the upbringing of the minor Name of minor girl child in the custody of the petitioner would not be proper or in the interest of the minor. The remaining contents are wrong and are denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
3.That the contents of paragraph 3 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that the contents of paragraph 3 of the petition show that the intention of the petitioner is to keep the minor Name of minor girl child at City where petitioner is employed, where he is employed with Employer company name, and where the office of Employer company name in City where company office is situated is situated. It is further denied that the welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child requires that she should continue in the care and custody of her maternal grandparents in Delhi. It is further denied that, prior to the order dated Date of court order, the petitioner had not taken any interest regarding the welfare of the minor and had never made any request to the respondents to meet the minor child. The contents of the remainder of the paragraph are denied.
It is further denied that, since the minor child is already studying at City where minor is studying, it would be against the interest of the minor child to shift her to City of proposed study shift for her studies. It is further denied that it is always desirable that the studies of the minor should be in continuity and at the same place. It is also denied that the studies and upbringing of the minor are continuing in a proper and congenial atmosphere at City where minor is brought up in the care and custody of respondent Nos. 2 and 3. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
4.That the contents of paragraph 4 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that respondent No. 1, the mother of the minor, has been falsely implicated in a murder case by the petitioner in collusion with the police in a well-planned manner and that she is in judicial custody. It is further denied that the mother of the petitioner was murdered by an unknown criminal on Date of mother-in-law's murder, and that in that incident respondent No. 1 also sustained injuries and was medically examined in respect of the injuries received by her. It is also denied that the petitioner, in the court of Sh. Name of the ASJ court judge, ASJ, on Date of petitioner's admission in ASJ court, admitted that the relations between respondent No. 1 and her mother-in-law were normal.
It is further denied that the minor child is being very well looked after by respondent Nos. 2 and 3, that she is studying in a reputed school, and that she is living happily with respondent Nos. 2 and 3. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
5.That the contents of paragraph 5 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that the respondents had never used abusive language or caused violence. It is further denied that the petitioner has intentionally made false and concocted charges with malafide intention. It is also denied that it is in the interest and welfare of the minor that she should continue in the care and custody of her maternal grandparents. It is further denied that the petitioner is living alone/separately at Petitioner's place of residence. It is further denied that the elder brother of the petitioner, along with his wife and children, is living separately at City where petitioner's brother lives. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
6.That the contents of paragraph 6 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that the petitioner is very close and friendly with one Name of young lady allegedly involved. It is further denied that the petitioner wishes to marry the said Name of young lady allegedly involved. It is also denied that the divorce petition has been filed by the petitioner with malafide intention and is without merit. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
7.That the contents of paragraph 7 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that the petitioner has falsely stated regarding his transfer to Delhi. It is further denied that the petitioner has not filed any order of his employer to show his transfer to City of intended transfer, or that the petitioner has not filed any copy of any request made by him to his employer for his transfer to Delhi. It is also denied that the petitioner had left City petitioner left for work in Year petitioner left that city and had gone to City petitioner moved to for work, and that since then he has been working there. It is also denied that the petitioner has no intention to get himself transferred to Delhi.
It is further denied that the house of the petitioner and the house of his brother are separate and situated at different places. It is also denied that the petitioner has no ownership in the house in which his brother is living, and that his brother has no ownership in the house owned by the petitioner in Delhi. It is further denied that the family of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 is very reputed, and that it is in the interest and welfare of the minor that she should not be given into the custody of the petitioner. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
8.That the contents of paragraph 8 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that the minor is in the care and custody of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 pursuant to the minor having been left in their care and custody by the petitioner himself. It is further denied that the petitioner is feeling deep anguish, disappointment and frustration on account of the acts, attitude and conduct of the respondents. It is also denied that the petitioner has made false and concocted averments with malafide intention. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
9.That the contents of paragraph 9 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are hereby denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and may kindly be read as part and parcel of the paragraph under reply, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
10.That the contents of paragraph 10 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3 are fit persons to take care of the minor, Name of minor girl child; the respondent No. 1 is stated to be about 52 years of age and respondent No. 2 about 50 years of age. It is further denied that respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3 have been taking proper care of the minor Name of minor girl child since Date since grandparents caring for minor. From the manner in which the averments have been made in this paragraph of the written statement, it is evident that the respondents seek to create confusion, and that the respondents have intentionally made false, confusing and vague averments. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the rejoinder are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, as they are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
11.That the contents of paragraph 11 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that there has been no separation of the parties; the respondents have made false and confusing averments with a malafide intention. It is further denied that the petitioner himself had left the minor Name of minor girl child at the residence of respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3. It is also denied that the petitioner wishes to marry Name of young lady allegedly involved, who is said to be the sister of his Bhabhi and with whom he is alleged to be very close and friendly. It is further denied that the petitioner is regularly in touch with Name of young lady allegedly involved or that he regularly speaks with her over the telephone. The rest of the contents are wrong and denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the rejoinder are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, as they are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
12.That the contents of paragraph 12 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that the petitioner is not interested in maintaining the child or in taking proper care of her. It is further denied that the petitioner is continuously neglecting the minor Name of minor girl child. It is also denied that the minor Name of minor girl child is already receiving proper education and is being properly brought up in a good and congenial atmosphere in the care and custody of respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3. It is further denied that the petitioner is in the habit of consuming liquor, that he is living alone in Petitioner's city of residence, and that Petitioner's city of residence is more than 650 kilometres from Delhi. It is further denied that respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3 are already providing the minor Name of minor girl child all the necessary amenities required for her proper upbringing and development, or that she is being brought up in a good and congenial atmosphere and in good culture. It is also denied that the petitioner does not have any family member living with him at City where petitioner is working, where he is working. It is further denied that the petitioner's elder brother, along with his wife and two children, have been living separately since long. It is also denied that the addresses of the petitioner, his brother and his Bhabhi are different, or that the petitioner holds a driving licence, Aadhaar card and election card bearing an address which is not that of his brother and Bhabhi. It is also denied that it will be against the welfare and interest of the minor Name of minor girl child to hand over her custody to the petitioner. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the rejoinder are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, as they are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
13.That the contents of paragraph 13 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that the petitioner has been living in Petitioner's city of residence since Year petitioner living there since and that he never approached the respondents to see or meet the minor Name of minor girl child. It is further denied that, the minor child being aged about 3 years and 4 months, it will be against the welfare and interest of the minor child to give her custody to the petitioner. It is also denied that the petitioner has not mentioned even the alleged terms which the respondents wish to dictate to him as claimed by him, or that it will be against the welfare of the minor Name of minor girl child to hand over her custody to the petitioner. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the rejoinder are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, as they are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
14.That the contents of paragraph 14 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that it will be against the interest and welfare of the minor child to give her custody to the petitioner, or that the petitioner is an unfit person to have the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child. The rest of the contentions are wrong and denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the rejoinder are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, as they are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
15.That the contents of paragraph 15 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that respondent No. 1 has been falsely implicated in the case as a result of a criminal conspiracy of the petitioner and police officials, or that she has been falsely implicated in the case due to collusion between the petitioner and the police officials in a well-planned manner. It is further denied that the petitioner is very close and friendly with Name of young lady allegedly involved. It is also denied that the petitioner wishes to marry Name of young lady allegedly involved, or that he has a strong motive to falsely implicate respondent No. 1 in collusion with the police in the criminal case. It is also denied that the petitioner has no legal right, in the circumstances of this case, to obtain the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is further denied that the petitioner has not mentioned any provision of law in support of his claimed legal position, or that the petitioner wishes to create confusion regarding the legal position. It is further denied that it is in the best interest and welfare of the minor that her custody should continue with respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3, with whom the minor is stated to be living continuously since Date since minor living with grandparents. It is also denied that the interest and welfare of the minor child will be adversely affected if her custody is given to the petitioner. The rest of the contents are wrong and denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the rejoinder are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, as they are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
16.That the contents of paragraph 16 of the written statement/reply are wrong, incorrect and are therefore denied. It is denied that the minor child, being a girl child of about three years and four months of age, is receiving proper education in a good atmosphere and proper culture. It is further denied that the conduct of the petitioner is such that he is an unfit person to have the custody of the minor Name of minor girl child. It is further denied that the minor Name of minor girl child is receiving education in a proper atmosphere and under the care and affection of respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3. It is also denied that the petitioner is an unfit person to obtain the custody of the minor from respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3. It is further denied that the minor Name of minor girl child enjoys proper comforts and is being provided all facilities and amenities for her physical and mental needs by respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3. It is further denied that the minor Name of minor girl child has a good atmosphere and proper culture at the residence of respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3, or that she is very happy and comfortable in their care and custody. It is also denied that the minor Name of minor girl child is receiving proper love and affection in the care and custody of respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3, or that she enjoys the love and affection of her maternal grandparents and is, on account thereof, very emotionally attached to respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3. It is further denied that the maternal grandparents of the minor Name of minor girl child are also very emotionally attached to her, or that the minor Name of minor girl child is receiving proper education and proper development in their care and custody. It is further denied that the maternal grandparents of the minor Name of minor girl child are providing all facilities for her physical needs and for her proper development and welfare. The rest of the contents are wrong and denied. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the rejoinder are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph under reply, as they are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
17.That the contents of paragraph 17 of the written statement/reply are wrong and incorrect and are hereby denied. It is denied that the minor Name of minor girl child has been living in the care and custody of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 since Date since minor in grandparents' custody. It is further denied that the petition is without merit, that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief claimed, or that the petition is liable to be dismissed with special costs to the respondents. However, the contents of the corresponding paragraph of the petition are reiterated as true and correct, and the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this paragraph in reply, as they are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
1.That the prayer clause of the reply is absolutely wrong and is specifically denied. The respondents are not entitled to any relief claimed therein.
1.That any allegation made in the reply and not specifically denied herein shall be deemed to be wrong and denied, and such non-specific denial shall not be treated as an admission on the part of the petitioner.
P R A Y E R :-
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly grant the relief in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents as prayed in the rejoinder, in the interest of justice, equity and the circumstances of the case.
1.That any further order or orders may also be passed as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.
It is prayed accordingly.
PETITIONER
DELHITHROUGH
DATED
Date of signing
ADVOCATE
Advocate's address,
Advocate's address.
IN THE COURT OF Name of the presiding officer of the Mahila Court, Designation of the presiding officer of the Mahila Court, Name and venue of the Mahila Court
C.C./Complaint case number/Complaint case year/2015.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Deponent's name (grandmother), W/o Deponent's husband's name, R/o Deponent's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the complainant in the above-mentioned case, am well conversant with the facts of the case and am competent to swear the present affidavit.
1.That the contents of the accompanying rejoinder to the reply have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the contents thereof have been duly read over and understood by me. After fully understanding the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true and correct to my knowledge.
1.That the facts stated therein may kindly be read as part and parcel of the present affidavit as well, as the contents thereof have not been reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Date of verification day of Month of verification, Year of verification, that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF Name of the presiding officer of the Mahila Court, Designation of the presiding officer of the Mahila Court, Name and venue of the Mahila Court
C.C./Complaint case number/Complaint case year/2015.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
D.O.H.: Date of hearing
REJOINDER ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT TO THE REPLY FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-
REJOINDER ON MERITS : -
1.That the contents of paragraph 1 of the reply to the application are reiterated. However, the contents of the complaint may kindly be read as an integral part of this replication, as the same are not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
1.That the contents of paragraph 2 of the reply are wrong and are therefore denied. However, the contents of the complaint may kindly be read as an integral part of this replication, as the same are not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
3-8. That the contents of paragraphs 3 to 8 of the reply to the application are wrong and are denied. However, the contents of the complaint may kindly be read as an integral part of this replication, as the same are not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
1.That the prayer clause of the reply to the application is absolutely wrong and is specifically denied. The respondents are not entitled to the relief claimed therein.
1.That any allegation made in the reply to the application and not specifically denied herein shall be deemed to be wrong and denied, and such non-specific denial shall not be treated as an admission on the part of the complainant.
P R A Y E R :-
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly grant the relief in favour of the complainant and against the respondents as prayed in the replication, in the interest of justice, equity and the circumstances of the case.
It is prayed accordingly.
DELHICOMPLAINANT
THROUGH
DATED
Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Advocate's address,
Advocate's address.
IN THE COURT OF Name of the presiding officer of the Family Court, Designation of the presiding officer of the Family Court, Name and venue of the Family Court
G. PETITION NO. Guardianship petition number/2015.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Deponent's name (petitioner), S/o Sh. Deponent's father's name, R/o Deponent's address, New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the petitioner in the above-mentioned matter, am well conversant with the facts of the case and am competent to swear the present affidavit.
1.That the contents of the accompanying rejoinder to the reply to the application have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the contents thereof have been duly read over and explained to me in my vernacular language. After fully understanding the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true and correct to my knowledge.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Date of verification day of Month of verification, Year of verification, that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part thereof is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT