IN THE COURT OF ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT KADAPA

I.A No. /2018

In
O.S No.246/2018
V.Sailaja …Petitioner/defendant
Vs.
P.Pavan Kumar 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 petitioner field this false petition for setting aside the
exparte order dated 05-10-2018. The petitioner intentionally absent at
the time of calling the suit for hearing on his behalf of the petitioner. The
petitioner was doing well on 05-10-2018 and that she was not suffering
with motions. The absence of the petitioner on 05-10-2018 is intentional
and will-full. The respondent filed his CHIEF EXAMINATION AFFIDAVIT as
PW-1 in the Honourable court on 12-10-2018 and PW-1 was examined
and marked Ex-A1 to Ex-A13 on 12-10-2018. The Honourable court was
pleased to post the suit for judgement to 24-10-2018. Then the petitioner
rushed to the Honourable court with a petition to set-aside the exparte
order dated 05-10-2018.

4. The petitioner is playing mischievous game and abusing the

process of the Honourable court by intentionally absenting in the
Honourable court at the time of calling the case for hearing the
petitioner. There is no sufficient and reasonable cause for setting aside
the exparte order dated 05-10-2018. There are no merits in this
application. The petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Therefore the respondent prays that the Honourable court

may be pleased to dismiss this petition with costs of Rs.2000/- in the
interest of justice.

ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT

 IN THE COURT OF ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT KADAPA
I.A No. /2018
In
O.S No.246/2018
V.Sailaja …Petitioner/defendant
Vs.
P.Pavan Kumar 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 petitioner field this false petition for reopening the suit
for filing the written statement of the defendant even though she was
called absent and exparte order dated 05-10-2018 was passed against the
petitioner. The petitioner intentionally absent at the time of calling the
suit for hearing on his behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner was doing
well on 05-10-2018 and that she was not suffering with motions. The
absence of the petitioner on 05-10-2018 is intentional and will-full. The
respondent filed his CHIEF-EXAMINATION AFFIDAVIT as PW-1 in the
Honourable court on 12-10-2018 and PW-1 was examined and marked
Ex-A1 to Ex-A13 on 12-10-2018. The Honourable court was pleased to
post the suit for judgement to 24-10-2018. Then the petitioner rushed to
the Honourable court with a petition for reopening the suit for filing
written statement of the defendant even though the exparte order dated
05-10-2018 was passed against the petitioner.

4. The petitioner is playing mischievous game and abusing the

process of the Honourable court by intentionally absenting in the
Honourable court at the time of calling the case for hearing the
petitioner. There is no sufficient and reasonable cause for reopening the
suit for filing written statement of the defendant even though the
exparte order dated 05-10-2018 was passed against the petitioner. There
are no merits in this application. The petition is liable to be dismissed.
 5. Therefore the respondent prays that the Honourable court
may be pleased to dismiss this petition with costs of Rs.2000/- in the
interest of justice.

ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT

 IN THE COURT OF ADDL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AT KADAPA
I.A No. /2018
In
O.S No.246/2018
V.Sailaja
…Petitioner/defendant
Vs.

P.Pavan Kumar 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