Written statement by defendant in commercial suit for recovery of cheque-dishonour amount
0 of 70 blanks filled
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Plaintiff's name: PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
Defendant's name: DEFENDANT
N.D.O.H.: Date of statement (day).Date of statement (month).Date of statement (year)
WRITTEN STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT IN THE COMMERCIAL SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS. Suit recovery amount (₹)/- ALONG WITH PENDENTE LITE AND FUTURE INTEREST.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -
PRELIMINARY SUBMISSIONS AND OBJECTIONS: -
1.That the captioned Suit has been filed by the Plaintiff, verified by the affidavit of one Mr. Plaintiff's verifying deponent's name, who purports to be the General Manager of the Plaintiff Company and states that he has gone through the entire copy of the suit and understood its purport and contents. The Defendant has accordingly filed its reply to the same. In reply to the Plaint, the Defendant vehemently denies each and every statement, averment and submission made therein, as the same are false, frivolous, misconceived and wholly baseless. Before making a para-wise reply to the Plaint, the Defendant seeks to set out the Preliminary Objections and Submissions herein below, which are urged independently of, and without prejudice to, each other. The instant Reply is being filed on behalf of the Defendant, who is the Sole Proprietor of M/s Defendant's proprietorship firm name Defendant's firm name (continuation).
2.That, at the outset, it is submitted that the present suit is not maintainable, as no cause of action against the Defendant has been made out by the Plaintiff. On the contrary, the Plaint contains a bundle of lies, untenable in the eyes of law, and the plaint is liable to be rejected as provided under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
3.That it is categorically stated that the Plaintiff is guilty of misrepresentation and non-disclosure of material facts. It is further categorically stated that, in the present case, the Plaintiff has not approached this Hon'ble Court with clean hands and has suppressed material facts therefrom. It has been so held in S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath, (1994) 1 SCC 1.
4.That the suit of the Plaintiff is not maintainable, inasmuch as the claim put forth by the Plaintiff seeking recovery of an alleged amount is without any legal, binding and subsisting cause of action. Since the Plaintiff, being guilty of conduct whereby it has suppressed material facts from this Hon'ble Court, is not entitled to any equitable relief from this Hon'ble Court, there is no swing of equity which can be claimed by the Plaintiff as a matter of right or otherwise.
5.Hence, having failed to disclose material facts, the Plaintiff has rendered itself liable to have the suit rejected at the very inception, so as to avoid unnecessary litigation. Further, the present suit, as framed and filed, is a gross abuse and misuse of the process of law and the legal machinery, and has been filed with the sole intention of harassing the Defendant. Hence, the suit is liable to be dismissed with costs.
6.The captioned proceedings instituted by the Plaintiff project a scenario which is not only disturbing but also has the potentiality to create a stir, compelling one to ponder, in a perturbed state, how some unprincipled and deviant persons can, in an ingenious, innovative and nonchalant manner, knock at the doors of the courts, as if the courts were a laboratory where multifarious experiments can take place, and how such skilled persons can adroitly abuse the process of the courts at their own will and desire, by painting a canvas of agony through assiduous assertions made in the pleadings, with the real intention of harassing the opposite party, without any remote remorse, the inventive design being primarily to harass the said Defendant.
7.That, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Defendant, and further without admitting any of the allegations levelled by the Plaintiff against the Defendant, it is submitted that the documents filed by the Plaintiff along with the suit cannot be taken on record, as the same are not properly pleaded in the suit; and the documents on which the Plaintiff has placed reliance cannot be read as part of the pleadings, since they find no mention in the contents of the suit. It is further pertinent to mention that the Plaintiff has relied upon fabricated and false documents, which fail to show any direct nexus between the averments made in the suit and the grievances portrayed by the Plaintiff.
8.That the Plaintiff has filed the present suit on mere presumptions and conjectures, and merely to falsely harass the Answering Defendant, while abusing the process of law and with an ulterior motive.
9.The Defendant submits that the Plaintiff has failed to come before this Hon'ble Court with clean hands, and has deliberately misrepresented facts and indulged in unethical practices in order to institute the present suit before this Hon'ble Court. The suit is not maintainable and is liable to be rejected at the very threshold, as the Plaintiff is guilty of suppression of material facts.
10.That, considering the objections mentioned above, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dismiss the present Suit with exemplary costs, as the same has been filed with unclean hands, suppression of facts and propagation of falsehood, and has been instituted by the Plaintiff with malafide intentions and ulterior motives.
11.In the case of Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. Ramesh Aggarwal, 135 (2006) DLT 666 : 2007 (1) R.A.J. 188, this Court has held that where the defendant is not residing or carrying on business within the jurisdiction of this Court, this Court cannot be said to have any territorial jurisdiction under Section 20 of the CPC to entertain the suit.
12.In addition to the above, it is submitted on behalf of the Defendant that the Plaintiff has not annexed any certificate or bank stamp to the statements of account maintained by the Plaintiff, and as such the same are forged and fabricated documents, since no documents proving the authenticity of the documents filed by the Plaintiff have been placed on record.
REPLY ON MERITS:
Without prejudice to the foregoing, and without in any manner admitting any of the submissions, contentions and allegations made in the suit, except those expressly admitted, the Answering Defendant tenders its para-wise reply to the suit as under:
1.That the contents of paragraph 1 of the plaint are denied. The authorised representative of the Plaintiff Company is not competent to file and sign the present suit. The contents of the Preliminary Submissions and Objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
2.That the contents of paragraph 2 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that the Plaintiff Company supplied knitted hosiery fabric items through various invoices to the satisfaction of the Defendant, and that the Defendant firm incurred a liability of Rs. Alleged liability amount (₹)/- towards the material purchased, as per the statement of account of the Plaintiff Company. The contents of the Preliminary Submissions and Objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
3.That the contents of paragraph 3 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is denied that, against the aforesaid alleged liability, the Defendant, on behalf of the firm, signed and issued seven cheques totalling Rs. Total amount of cheques (₹)/- in favour of the Plaintiff Company in discharge of the liability. The cheques issued to the Plaintiff Company were not against any legally enforceable debt and were given only for security purposes. The contents of the Preliminary Submissions and Objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
4.That the contents of paragraph 4 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. It is specifically denied that the Defendant, at the time of handing over the cheques to the Plaintiff company, gave any assurance whatsoever that the said cheques would be honoured positively upon their presentation. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
5.That the contents of paragraph 5 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
6.That the contents of paragraph 6 of the plaint are denied insofar as they state that a legal notice under Section 138 of the NI Act was sent by the Plaintiff to the Defendant. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
7.That the contents of paragraph 7 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that the Plaintiff sent a legal notice for recovery of, or demanding payment of, the said liability on Date of recovery legal notice (day).Date of recovery legal notice (month).Date of recovery legal notice (year), or that the said notice was refused by the Defendant. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
8.That the contents of paragraph 8 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that the Plaintiff supplied the goods to the Defendant firm under various invoices and that the Defendant company duly received the said goods. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
9.That the contents of paragraph 9 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that, as per the ledger account books of the Plaintiff, the Defendant firm carries a liability as on date of Rs.Liability amount (₹, lakhs/crore),Liability amount (₹, thousands),Liability amount (₹, units)/-. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
10.That the contents of paragraph 10 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that, in the month of Month of ledger confirmation, Year of ledger confirmation, the Defendant confirmed the ledger account and admitted the liability over the telephone to Mr. Plaintiff's General Manager's name, General Manager of the Plaintiff company. It is further denied that, despite confirming the ledger account and admitting the liability, the Defendant failed to make any payment to the Plaintiff company. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
11.That the contents of paragraph 11 of the plaint are a matter of want of knowledge and are accordingly denied. It is denied that the Defendant intentionally and deliberately failed to appear in the pre-institution mediation and settlement proceedings. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
12.That the contents of paragraph 12 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that the cause of action for filing the present suit first arose on First cause of action date (day).First cause of action date (month).First cause of action date (year), when the Defendant approached the Plaintiff firm for purchasing knitted hosiery fabric items through a purchase order and the Plaintiff supplied the same to the Defendant firm under various invoices, and that the total liability of the Defendant at present is Rs.Present liability amount (₹)/-. It is further denied that the cause of action further arose when the Defendant made the last payment to the Plaintiff on Date of last payment (day).Date of last payment (month).Date of last payment (year), and issued seven cheques bearing different dates, from First cheque date (day).First cheque date (month).First cheque date (year) to Last cheque date (day).Last cheque date (month).Last cheque date (year), in favour of the Plaintiff against the said liability on Date of issue of cheques (day).Date of issue of cheques (month).Date of issue of cheques (year), and that all the said cheques were dishonoured on different dates up to Last cheque dishonour date (day).Last cheque dishonour date (month).Last cheque dishonour date (year). It is further denied that the cause of action further arose when the Plaintiff sent a legal notice to the Defendant in respect of the said dishonoured cheques, that the said legal notice was duly served upon the Defendant, and that the last legal notice was sent to the Defendant on Date of last legal notice (day).Date of last legal notice (month).Date of last legal notice (year) and was refused by the Defendant, or that the Defendant acknowledged the liability and duly confirmed the statement of account of the Plaintiff company on Date of confirmation of statement of account (day).Date of confirmation of statement of account (day).Date of confirmation of statement of account (day). It is further denied that the cause of action further arose when the Plaintiff filed a pre-litigation application before Mediation, Delhi and this Hon'ble Court issued summons to the Defendant, and that the Defendant, despite service, intentionally and knowingly failed to appear, whereafter CDLSA, Delhi was pleased to issue a non-starter report in favour of the Plaintiff on CDLSA non-starter report date (day).CDLSA non-starter report date (month).CDLSA non-starter report date (year). It is further denied that the cause of action for filing the present suit is still continuing. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
13.That the contents of paragraph 13 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that the Defendant visited the office of the Plaintiff from time to time to purchase knitted hosiery items, or that the Plaintiff supplied the knitted hosiery items to the Defendant to the full satisfaction of the Defendant. It is further denied that the cause of action for filing the suit arose at Delhi, and therefore that this Hon'ble Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the suit. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
14.That the contents of paragraph 14 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
15.That the contents of paragraph 15 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that the Defendant intentionally failed to appear in the pre-mediation settlement proceedings. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
16.That the contents of paragraph 16 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that the present suit has been filed within the period stipulated and prescribed under law. The contents of the preliminary submissions and objections may be read as part and parcel of this reply, and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
17.That the contents of para 17 of the plaint are in the nature of a legal submission and require no reply on facts. For the sake of brevity, the contents of the preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein, and the same may be read as part and parcel of this reply.
18.That the contents of para 18 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. For the sake of brevity, the contents of the preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein, and the same may be read as part and parcel of this reply.
19.That the contents of para 19 of the plaint are wrong and are denied. It is specifically denied that the Plaintiff is legally entitled to recover the suit amount, and it is further denied that the suit filed by the Plaintiff is bona fide. For the sake of brevity, the contents of the preliminary submissions and objections are not repeated herein, and the same may be read as part and parcel of this reply.
It is respectfully submitted that the present suit is absolutely false, frivolous, baseless, misconceived and vexatious, besides being unsustainable in law, and is therefore liable to be dismissed with compensatory costs.
The prayer paragraph of the plaint, along with its sub-paragraphs, is absolutely wrong and is specifically denied. Hence, the Plaintiff is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed therein.
P R A Y E R
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may dismiss the plaint of the Plaintiff with heavy costs in favour of the answering Defendant and against the Plaintiff, for unnecessarily dragging the answering Defendant into frivolous litigation, in the interest of justice, equity and in 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 favour of the answering Defendant, in the interest of justice.
It is prayed accordingly.
DEFENDANT
DELHI
DATEDTHROUGH
Name of law firm
ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS
Law firm address,
NEW DELHI-110014.
EMAIL: Law firm email address
PHONE: +Law firm phone number
VERIFICATION
Verified at Place of verification on this Verification date (day) day of Month and year of verification that the contents of paragraphs 1 to 19 of the written statement are true and correct to the Defendant's knowledge, derived from legal information received and believed to be true, and that the contents of paragraphs 1 to Number of paras in preliminary submissions of the preliminary submissions are true and correct to the Defendant's knowledge, derived from legal information received and believed to be true.
The last paragraph is the prayer to this Hon'ble Court.
DEFENDANT
IN THE COURT OF Name of the judge/court, Designation of the judge, (COMMERCIAL COURT-Commercial court number), DIST. District of the court,
Court complex, City of the court.
CS (COMM.) NO. Commercial suit number OF Year of the suit.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Plaintiff's name (affidavit cause title): PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
Defendant's name (affidavit cause title): DEFENDANT
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr./Ms. Deponent's name, Deponent's designation/capacity of M/s. Deponent's firm name, having office at Deponent's firm address line 1, Deponent's firm address line 2, presently at Place of swearing/affirmation, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1.That I am the Defendant in the above case and am thoroughly conversant with the facts and circumstances thereof, pursuant to the information provided to me, and am competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the accompanying written statement to the plaint has been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the contents thereof have been duly read over and explained to me and understood by me. After fully understanding the contents thereof, I state that the facts stated therein are true and correct to my knowledge.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at Place of swearing/affirmation on this Verification date (day) day of Month and year of verification that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT