IN THE COURT OF ADDL SENOIR CIVIL JUDGE AT KADAPA

I.A No.486/2018
In
O.S No.140/2017
P.Mohan Reddy … Petitioner/ Defendant
Vs.
D.V.Narasimha Reddy … Respondent/Plaintiff
COUNTER FILED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT

1. The petition is unjust and not maintainable either in law or on

facts.

2. The petitioner is put to strict proof on all the allegations

made in the affidavit which are not expressly admitted here in by this
Respondent.

3. The Honourable court was pleased to pass decree in favour of

the plaintiff on 14-11-2017. The petitioner/defendant received court
summons and attachment petition notice in this suit. The attachment of
the house property of the petitioner was made by the court Amein by
beat of TomTom in that area of the house of the defendant. The
petitioner defendant did not appear in the Honourable court in
obedience to court summons and attachment notice. The petitioner is
watching all the proceedings in this suit. The petitioner/defendant
internationally absented from attending to the Honourable court on the
date when he is bound to appear in the Honourable as per the court
summons and court attachment notice. The petitioner with malafide
intention filed this false petition to protract the proceeding of the
Honourable court.

4. The petitioner was not suffering from ill-health. The

petitioner has been keeping very good health even on 14-11-2017. There
is no reasonable ground to Condon the delay in filing the set-aside
petition. The petitioner did not submit any valid reason for every days
delay in filing the set-aside petition. The petitioner did not file medical
certificate for proving his ill-health of the petitioner on 14-11-2017. There
are no merits in this petition. The petition is liable to be dismissed. The
delay need not be condoned since the petitioner intentionally with
fraudulent intention for causing loss and injustice to the
respondent/plaintiff filed this false petition.
 :: 2 ::

5. Prayer: Therefore the respondent prays that Honourable court

may be pleased to dismiss this petition with exemplary costs in the
interest of Justice. In case if the Honourable feels to allow this petition
respondent prays that the Honourable court may be pleased to allow this
petition on costs of Rs.15,000/- for meeting the ends of the Justice.

The above stated facts are verified and those facts are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief and signed
this at Kadapa on 6th Day of July 2018.

Advocate for the respondent/plaintiff

 IN THE COURT OF ADDL
SENOIR CIVIL JUDGE AT KADAPA
I.A No.486/2018
In
O.S No.140/2017

P.Mohan Reddy

… Petitioner/ Defendant

Vs.

D.V.Narasimha Reddy

… Respondent/Plaintiff

COUNTER FILED ON BEHALF

OF THE RESPONDENT

Filed by:

Sri. K. Venkata Reddy, B.Com., B.L.,

Advocate for the respondent/plaintiff,
Kadapa
 IN THE COURT OF ADDL SENOIR CIVIL JUDGE AT KADAPA
I.A No.487/2018
In
O.S No.140/2017
P.Mohan Reddy … Petitioner/ Defendant
Vs.
D.V.Narasimha Reddy … Respondent/Plaintiff
COUNTER FILED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT

1. The petition is unjust and not maintainable either in law or on

facts.

2. The petitioner is put to strict proof on all the allegations

made in the affidavit which are not expressly admitted here in by this
Respondent.

3. The Honourable court was pleased to pass decree in favour of

the plaintiff on 14-11-2017. The petitioner/defendant received court
summons and attachment petition notice in this suit. The attachment of
the house property of the petitioner was made by the court Amein by
beat of TomTom in that area of the house of the defendant. The
petitioner defendant did not appear in the Honourable court in
obedience to court summons and attachment notice. The petitioner is
watching all the proceedings in this suit. The petitioner/defendant
intentionally absented from attending to the Honourable court on the
date when he is bound to appear in the Honourable as per the court
summons and court attachment notice. The petitioner with malafide
intention filed this false petition to protract the proceeding of the
Honourable court. The petitioner has no right to file this petition since he
has malafide intention and voluntarily kept himself away from appearing
in the Honourable court on 14-11-2017 when the suit was called for
hearing of the parties in the Honourable court.

4. The petitioner was not suffering from ill-health. The

petitioner has been keeping very good health even on 14-11-2017. There
is no reasonable ground to set-aside to exparte decree dated 14-11-2017
passed by the Honourable court after giving sufficient time to petitioner
for appearing in Honourable court. The petitioner did not submit any
valid reason for absenting in appearing in the Honourable court on 14-11-
2017. The plea of ill-health of the petitioner is totally incorrect and false
and that plea was taken for filing this false petition. The petitioner did not
 :: 2 ::

file medical certificate issued by the RIMS doctor for proving his ill-health
of the petitioner on 14-11-2017. There are no merits in this petition. The
petition is liable to be dismissed. The petition need not be allowed since
the petitioner intentionally with fraudulent intention for causing loss and
injustice to the respondent/plaintiff filed this false petition. The
petitioner has to deposit half of the decree amount Rs. 6,60,000/- in the
Honourable court for setting aside the exparte decree with the
permission to the respondent/plaintiff to withdraw that amount
unconditionally.

5. Prayer: Therefore the respondent prays that Honourable court

may be pleased to dismiss this petition with exemplary costs in the
interest of Justice. In case if the Honourable feels to allow this petition,
the respondent prays that the Honourable court may be pleased to allow
this petition on depositing half of the decree amount Rs. 6,60,000/- in the
Honourable court for setting aside the exparte decree with the
permission to the respondent/plaintiff to withdraw that amount
unconditionally for meeting the ends of the Justice.

The above stated facts are verified and those facts are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief and signed
this at Kadapa on 6 th Day of July 2018.

Advocate for the respondent/plaintiff

 IN THE COURT OF ADDL
SENOIR CIVIL JUDGE AT KADAPA

I.A No.487/2018
In
O.S No.140/2017

P.Mohan Reddy

… Petitioner/ Defendant

Vs.

D.V.Narasimha Reddy

… Respondent/Plaintiff

COUNTER FILED ON BEHALF

OF THE RESPONDENT

Filed by:

Sri. K. Venkata Reddy, B.Com., B.L.,

Advocate for the respondent/plaintiff,
Kadapa