IN THE COURT OF SH. PRITAM SINGH, LD.
JUDGE, FAMILY
COURT-01, SOUTH DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, DELHI
C.S. No. 15/2024
In The Matter of:
ASHISH SINGH ...PLAINTIFF
VS..
NEHA KHANDELWAL ...DEFENDANT
NDOH:15.01.2025
INDEX
S.No Particulars Page
. No.
1. Replication to written statement filed by the
Defendant or by behalf of the petitioner along with
supporting affidavit
Petitioner
IN THE COURT OF SH. PRITAM SINGH, LD. JUDGE, FAMILY
COURT-01, SOUTH DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, DELHI
C.S. No. 15/2024
In The Matter of:
ASHISH SINGH ...PLAINTIFFS..
NEHA KHANDELWAL ...DEFENDANT
NDH: 15.01.2025
REPLICATION TO WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE
DEFENDANT OR BY BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER
NAMELY-ASHISH SINGH
Most Respectfully Showeth:
Preliminary objections
I. At the outset, the Defendant denies, dispute, refute and repudiates each
and every unsubstantiated, malicious, fictitious and fallacious allegation,
contentions, statements, submissions, representation, assertion and/or
averments made by the Plaintiff in the Plaint under consideration as if the
same are set out hereunder and traversed in seriatim. Save what are
matter of record and save what would strictly appear therefrom, the
contents of the Plaint under reply are denied in toto. Further, it is humbly
submitted that nothing herein ought to be construed as admission by the
Defendant merely in the absence of specific response, rebuttal and/or
denial to any of the fallacious, malicious and fictitious statements,
contentions, submissions, representation and averments made by the
Petitioner.
II. That Present suit is an abuse of the process of court. No defamation
was ever committed against plaintiff by respondent. The present suit
thus, need to be dismissed in limine without any thing further with
compensatory costs.
III. That it is respectfully submits that no cause of action has been arisen
in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant ever, as there was no
act of defamation was ever committed against plaintiff by defendant. It is
pertinent to mention that plaintiff has not filed .a single document or
evidence alongwith plaint which can substantiate his false and baseless
averments.
IV. That through the present suit the plaintiff has misled the Hon’ble court
by making false assertions in the plaint. The plaintiff in order to harass
the defendant through present false suit has field a false certificate under
Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. Under the certificate under
Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act field by plaintiff along-with plaint
falsely claimed that “emails are identical to the soft copies maintained
by me in my office computer operated by me and I also confirm that
the contents of the hard copies of the above-mentioned emails are
identical to the soft copies maintained on the server of the Ministry of
Defence operated by me”. But the PCDA, Ministry of Defence, New
Delhi in response/reply to a RTI dated 24.07.2024 filed by defendant
categorically denied that the plaintiff is not authorised to access the data
stored in server of PCDA, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi.
V. That the plaintiff by filing false certificate under Section 65B of Indian
Evidence Act has committed offence of perjury and liable to be
prosecuted for offence of furnishing false evidence and a proceeding may
issue under Section 340 of Code of Criminal Procedure against the
plaintiff.
VI. That it is further respectfully submitted that the present suit is not
only vexatious but also reflects the vindictive nature of the Plaintiff. The
defendant categorically denies each and every allegation/contention made
by the Plaintiff in the present plaint. It is also pertinent to mention that the
present suit is misconceived, baseless and crammed with
misrepresentation and concealment of facts. Furthermore, the suit is
based on mere conjectures and surmises and the same.is liable to be set
aside with exemplary costs in favour of the defendant.
Preliminary submissions.
Since the Plaintiff has not placed the true and correct facts before the
Hon’ble Court and has not approached the Hon’ble Court with clean
hands, the Defendant wishes to place on record true and correct facts for
the just adjudication of the issues in question sought to be raised by the
Petitioner.
1. That the plaintiff is habitual in filing/pursuing false litigation against
the defendant. Earlier the plaintiff has filed a suit for divorce bearing no.
535/2022 against the defendant which is pending adjudication before Ld.
Judge, Family Court Saket Courts, New Delhi. In the said petition for
divorce the plaintiff also furnished a false - affidavit in the form of
supporting affidavit alongwith the application to file additional
documents. In the said application dated 27.08.2023 the plaintiff has
stated that he obtained the copies of documents through RTI from his
department i.e., PCDA, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi. However, the-
said PCDA, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi in response/reply to a RTI
dated6.03.2024 filed by defendant stated that “No RTI application has
been received from Sh. Ashish Singh, Sr. Auditor pursuant to Emails sent
by Neha under RTI, Act 2005 for the period of April 2021 to December
2023
2. That in the said application dated 27.08.2053 filed by plaintiff in
petition bearing no. 535/2022?stated that he obtained emails dated
8.07.2021, 9.07.2021, 09.7.2021,19.7.2021, 9.08.2021, 11.08.2021
through a RTI from PCDA, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi. But in the
present suit the plaintiff affirmed that above stated emails are maintained
by plaintiff in his office computer. Hence, the plaintiff misled the Hon’ble
court and committed offence of perjury.
3. That the plaintiff is neither authorised to access the server of Ministry
of Defence nor the soft copies are stored defendant’s office computer, but
the defendant has stolen from server of Ministry of Defence. Thus, the
Plaintiff has committed the offence of theft. The Plaintiff is incumbent
upon to drag defendant in multiple false cases in order to create mental
agony and harassment of the defendant and to create undue pressureso
that defendant give divorce to plaintiff. It is worth to mention that the
defendant is striving to save her married life.
4. That the defendant has never sent or circulate any defamatory,
derogatory and unsustainable emails/letters with an object to defame or
malign the reputation of plaintiff to any authority at any point of time. It
is pertinent to mention that the defendant was married with Plaintiff
according to Hindu rites, rituals and ceremonies at Radiance Motel,
Banquet Hall, Chhatarpur, New Delhi on 4th December, 2020. Before
marriage the Plaintiff alongwith his parents demanded defendant’s father
to' spend at least fifty lakhs rupees (Rs. 50, 00,000/-) in marriage which
included demand of a KIA Seltos car and cash amount of (Rs.20, 00,000/)
by way of dowery. The father of defendant has incurred an expenditure of
around 'Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs (Rs.25, 00,000/-) in Organizing and
solemnizing marriage of his daughter (i.e, defendant).
5. That on morning of 9th April, 2021 plaintiff threatened defendant that
he will cause defendant raped by different boys and extort money from
defendant in order to make his dream of purchasing KIA Seltos car true.
After this plaintiff deserted the defendant at rented accommodation in
Madangir, New Delhi without informing her. The complainant waited for
plaintiff whole night of 9th and 10 of April, 2021, and made countless
calls to petitioner, but every time his phone number came switched off.
The defendant also tried to contact petitioner’s family, but they also
didn’t pick her calls. Thereafter, defendant visited her in-law’s home in
Civil Lines, Delhi, but petitioner’s parents didn’t allowed her to enter into
their house, and pushed defendant out of the house. Thereafter, defendant
came to her parental home at Chhatarpur, New Delhi. After waiting for
the plaintiff or two days the complainant lodged a missing complaint in
PS Ambedkar Nagar. Further on 19.04.2021 the defendant lodged a
complaint in CAW cell, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi.
6. That after being- deserted by the plaintiff the defendant took resort to
remedies available to her in law. The defendant has not let any stone
unturned to save her marital life. After desertion the defendant faced lot
of mental traumas and was under severe depression as the plaintiff
severed/abandoned all his ties with defendant. The defendant approached
and requested lawful authorities to save her marriage. The defendant only
pleaded for justice.
7. That the Plaintiff in his letter/reply dated 31.08.2021 sent to his
department i.e., PCDA, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi levelled false,
malicious, defamatory, scandalous, derogatory, baseless and
unsustainable remarks against the Defendant. In the said reply the
Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant has demanded Rupees 25 lacs from
plaintiff to marry her boyfriend. Also, the Plaintiff and his family
constantly defaming the Defendant throughout among her society,
relatives and known persons. The Plaintiff and his family in order to
create undue pressure on defendant to obtained divorce by hook or crook
persistently defaming defendant among her society and relatives.
REPLY ON MERITS:
1. Contents of para 1 is specifically denied to the extent that plaintiff is a
law-abiding citizen. It submitted that habitual in misleading the Hon’ble
court and filing false affidavits/furnishing false evidence before court of
law. Rest of contents need no reply.
2. Contents of para 2 need no reply.
3. Contents of para 3 are matter of record to the extent of factum of
pendency of divorce petition bearing no. 535/2022 and lodging of FIR
bearing no. 22/2021, P.S. CAW Cell, Nanakpura. Rest of the contents of
para under reply are specifically denied being false, wrong and incorrect.
It is submitted that plaintiff wilfully deserted the defendant on 9th April,
2021. It is worth to mention that on morning of 9th April, 2021 plaintiff
threatened defendant that he will cause defendant raped by different boys
and extort money from defendant in order to make his dream of
purchasing KIA Seltos car true. After this plaintiff deserted the defendant
at rented accommodation in Madangir, New Delhi without informing her.
4. Contents of para 4and 5 are specifically denied being false wrong and
incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same. It is
specifically denied that defendant has ever levelled false, scandalous
allegations against plaintiff or his family to malign plaintiffs reputation. It
is further submitted that the Defendant after being meted with cruelty,
physical, sexual and mental harassment from plaintiff, and after being
deserted by plaintiff resorted to legal remedies available to her in law.
The defendant only approached the law enforcement agencies and
concerned departments to seek| justice. The Plaintiff in his letter/reply
dated 31.08.2021 sent to his department i.e.., PCDA, Ministry of
Defence, New Delhi levelled, false, malicious, defamatory, scandalous,
derogatory, baseless and1 unsustainable remarks against the Defendant.
In the said reply the Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant has demanded
Rupees 25 lacs from plaintiff to marry her boyfriend. Also, the Plaintiff
and his family constantly defaming the Defendant throughout among her
society, relatives and known persons. '
5. Contents of para 6 are specifically denied being false, wrong and
incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same.
6. Contents .of para 7 are specifically denied being false, wrong and
incorrect. The defendant was committed to her marriage and just tried to
save her marriage despite the cruelty and harassment she meted with from
the Plaintiff on numerous occasions. The Plaintiff may be put to strict
proof of the same.
7. Contents of para 8 are specifically denied being false, wrong and
incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same.
8. Contents of para 9 are specifically denied being false, wrong and
incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same.
9. Contents of para 10 are specifically denied being false, wrong and
incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same.
10.Contents of para 11 are specifically denied being false, wrong and
incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict’ proof of the same. It is
submitted that the defendant only approached the law enforcement i
agencies and concerned departments to seek justice.
11.Contents of para 12 are specifically denied being false, wrong and
incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same.
12.Contents of para 13 are specifically denied being false, wrong and
incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same. It is
submitted that no cause of action ever arose in favour of plaintiff and
against the Defendant.
13. Contents of Para 14 are specifically denied being false, wrong and
incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same. It is
submitted that no: prima facie case is made out in favour of plaintiff and
against the Defendant. '
14.Contents of para 15' are specifically denied, being false, wrong and
incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same. It is
submitted that no injury was ever caused to plaintiff due to any act of
defendant. It is further submitted that the defendant only approached the
law enforcement agencies and; concerned departments to seek justice.
15.Contents of para 16 are specifically denied being false, misleading,
wrong and incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same.lt
is submitted that no prejudice is caused to plaintiff or his family ever sue
to acts of defendant.
16.Contents of para 17 are specifically denied being false, misleading,
wrong and incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same. .
17.Contents of para.18 are specifically denied being false, misleading,
wrong and incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same.
18.Contents of para 19 are legal. 19.Contents of para 20 are legal.
20.Contents of para 21 are specifically denied being false, misleading,
wrong and incorrect. The Plaintiff may be put to strict proof of the same.
21.Contents of para 22 are specifically denied being false,
misleading, wrong and incorrect. The Plaintiff may be
put to strict proof of the same.
Reply to Prayer Clause:
Relief so claimed is incapable of being granted as they are neither
based on true and correct facts nor supported by the documentary proof or
direct/admissible evidences..
Prayer:
It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be
pleased to dismiss the suit of the Plaintiff and direct the Plaintiff to pay
costs, of defending the same to the ahswering defendant.
DEFENDANT Through
A
New Delhi: '
Dated.8'10-^
: COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT . SHADMAN ALI, RAVIKANT
ADVOCATES B-9, SHEKHAR APARTMENT,
MAYUR VIHAR PHASE-I EXTENSION, NEW DELHI-110091
VERIFICATION:
Verified at on this day: of October,
2024 that that the contents of paras 1 to 21 of the written
statement on merits and those of para 1 to 7 of preliminary
submissions are true and correct to my knowledge and
belief, para I to VI of preliminary objections and those of
paras 18, 19, and 21 of reply on merits ^re true to my
information received by my counsel and believed to be
correct. Last para is a prayer to this Hon’ble Forum.
DEFENDANT
