IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SHAHDARA): KKD: DELHI

SUIT NO. /2017

In Re:-

Smt. Sonia Devi & Anr. …Plaintiffs

Versus

Smt. Ritu Sharda & Ors. …Defendants

INDEX

S.No. Particulars Page No. Court Fee

1. Memo of Parties ---

2. Suit for permanent prohibitory Rs.13/-

injunction

3. Affidavits in support of the suit. ---

4. Application U/O 39 Rules 1 & 2 r/w Rs.2/-

Section 151, CPC.

5. Affidavits in support of application ---

U/O 39 Rules 1 & 2.

6. Address Form ---

7. List of documents along with ---

documents

8. Duplicate copy of the suit ---

9. Vakalatnama Rs.2/-

Filed by:

Plaintiffs
Through

Delhi. (MRIDUL JAIN)

Dated: Advocate
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SHAHDARA): KKD: DELHI

SUIT NO. /2017

In Re:-

Smt. Sonia Devi & Anr. …Plaintiffs

Versus

Smt. Ritu Sharda & Ors. …Defendants

MEMO OF PARTIES

1. Smt. Sonia Devi

W/o Sh. Vijay Kumar Sharda
2. Sh. Rituraj Sharda
S/o Sh. Vijay Kumar Sharda
Both R/o A – 166, Brij Vihar,
Ghaziabad, U.P. 201011. …Plaintiffs

Versus

1. Smt. Ritu Sharda

W/o Sh. Vikas Sharda
R/o E 110, 2nd Floor, Jhilmil Colony,
Delhi – 110095.
2. Sh. Shri Krishan Aggarwal
3. Smt. Usha Aggarwal
W/o Sh. Shri Krishan Aggarwal
Both R/o 7/275, Jain Mandir Gali,
Farsh Bazar, Shahdara, Delhi 110032. …Defendants

Plaintiffs
Through

Delhi. (MRIDUL JAIN)

Dated: Advocate
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SHAHDARA): KKD: DELHI

SUIT NO. /2017

In Re:-

Smt. Sonia Devi & Anr. …Plaintiffs

Versus

Smt. Ritu Sharda & Ors. …Defendants

SUIT FOR PERMANENT PROHIBITORY INJUNCTION.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-

1. That the plaintiffs are law abiding and peace loving citizens of
the state residing at the above said address. The plaintiff no.2
is son of the plaintiff no.1.

2. That the defendant no.1 (wife of the estranged / disowned son

of the plaintiff no.1) is daughter in law of the plaintiff no.1.
The defendant no.2 is father of the defendant no.1 and the
defendant no.3 is mother of the defendant no.1.

3. That the elder son of the plaintiff no.1, Sh. Vikas Sharda had
been married to the defendant no.1. After some time of the
marriage there started disputes between the plaintiff’s family
and the defendant no.1 and Sh. Vikas Sharda. Hence,
husband of the plaintiff Sh. Vijay Kumar Sharda disowned Sh.
Vikas Sharda and his wife, i.e., the defendant no.1. Public
notice to this effect had been published in the newspaper
Dainik Jagran dated 30.09.2001 and since then the plaintiff
and her family including the plaintiff no.2 had no relation with
Sh. Vikas Sharda, the defendants or their family.
4. That in the month of July and August 2017, the defendant
no.1 made phone calls to the plaintiff no.2 from Mob.
No.9810048893 but the plaintiff no.2 on seeing on truecaller
that the number belongs to the defendant no.1 did not
attended the phone call. On 04.08.2017, the defendant no.1,
sent a whatsapp message to the plaintiff no.2 that she want
some money (Later on it was revealed that the defendant no.1
was demanding Rs.3.5 Lakhs) and chain (Gold). Surprised by
the message the plaintiff no.2 on whatsapp asked the
defendant no.1 regarding which money and chain she was
talking because the plaintiff no.2 had no such dealings with
the defendant No.1. On this the defendant no.1 replied that
she wants the same not from the plaintiff no.2 but from Sh.
Vikas Sharda.

5. That the plaintiff no.2 told the defendant no.1 that he has no
concern with his brother and she may do whatever she likes
do to against Sh. Vikas Sharda, the plaintiff no.2 has no
concern with him. But the defendant no.1 continued to threat
the plaintiff no.2 that in case she is not getting the same she
would visit the house of the Sister of the plaintiff no.2 and
would create a scene there and would insult and defame the
plaintiffs and daughter of the plaintiff no.1 among the
neighbours, relatives and in laws of the daughter of the
plaintiff no.1. The plaintiff no.2 tried his level best to make
the defendant no.1 understand that whatever the matter is,
the same is between the defendant no.1 and her husband and
neither the plaintiffs nor their family including the sister of the
plaintiff no.2 has any connection with sh. Vikas Sharda and
requested not to create any such scene. But all in vain.

6. That the plaintiff no.2 informed the same to the plaintiff no.1.
The plaintiff no.1 and 2 also tried to make the defendants
understand not to create any such scene at the house of her
daughter but all the defendants told the plaintiffs in clear
worlds that they want Rs.3.5 lakhs and one gold chain, the
same be provided either by Sh. Vikas Sharda or by the
plaintiffs and in case the same is not provided, the defendants
 along with their friends, relatives, etc. would visit the house of
the plaintiffs and daughter of the plaintiff no.1 and would
collect the residents from neighbourhood / locality and would
create a scene and would defame and insult the plaintiffs and
daughter of the plaintiff no.1 before the neighbours and in
laws of the daughter of the plaintiff no.1. The plaintiffs
requested the defendant nos. 2 and 3, to make the defendant
no.1 understand not to commit any such act and not to create
any such scene but they also talked in the same voice as the
defendant no.1 and told the plaintiffs that in case the
demands of the defendant no.1 is not fulfilled they would
materialise the threats given by the defendant no.1.

7. That the plaintiffs in order to save reputation of themselves

and daughter of the plaintiff no.1 have made all out efforts to
make the defendants understand not to create any scene to
defame and insult the plaintiffs and daughter of the plaintiff
no.1 in their locality / neighbourhood, among relatives, etc.
but the defendants are bent upon to do the same if the
plaintiffs does not succumb to illegal demands of Rs.3.5 lakhs
and Gold chain.

8. That the plaintiff No.2 in this regard, made complaint to the

SHO PS Vivek Vihar and Chowki Incharge Radhakunj Chowki
to but the police officials refused to take any action stating
that it is a family dispute of civil nature.

9. That family of the plaintiffs and family of the daughter of the

plaintiff no.1 are having their respect in society and in case
the defendants create a scene in the neighbourhood of the
plaintiffs or that of the daughter of the plaintiff no.1 that
would not only malign the image to the plaintiffs and daughter
of the plaintiff no.1 but would also create problems in the in
laws family of the daughter of the plaintiff no.1 and it would
cause irreparable loss to the image of the plaintiffs and
daughter of the plaintiff no.1 which cannot be compensated in
terms of money.
10. That the plaintiffs have not filed any other similar suit before
this Hon’ble Court or before any other court.

11. That the cause of action arose on 04.08.2017 when the

defendant no.1 firstly threatened the plaintiff no.2. The cause
of action is still subsisting and continuing.

12. That the suit is valued for the purpose of court fee and
jurisdiction at Rs.130/- for the relief of permanent injunction,
on which, the Court fee of Rs.13/- each is payable and hence
the requisite court fees of Rs.13/- has been affixed.

13. That the defendants reside and work for gain at Shahdara
Distt., Delhi. Hence, this Hon’ble Court has got jurisdiction to
try and entertain the present suit.

14. That there was no other efficacious remedy available to the

plaintiff except to file the present suit.

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble

Court may kindly be pleased to pass:-

a) a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction in

favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants
thereby restraining the defendants, their associates,
representatives, heirs and attorneys, etc. from entering,
visiting the house of the plaintiffs, daughter of the
plaintiff no.1 and / or creating hindrance in peaceful
enjoyment, ingress, outgress of house of plaintiffs, i.e.,
A – 166, Brij Vihar, Ghaziabad, U.P. 201011 and / or
that of daughter of the plaintiff no.1, i.e., Q - 28,
Naveen Shahdara, Delhi - 110032;

b) costs in favour of the plaintiffs and against the

defendants;

c) to pass such other/further order(s) which this

Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and
 circumstances of the case in favour of the plaintiff and
against the defendants in the interest of justice.

Plaintiffs
Through
Delhi.
Dated: (MRIDUL JAIN)
Advocate

VERIFICATION:

Verified at Delhi on this ___ day of August, 2017 that the

contents of paras 1 to 11 of the plaint are true and correct to
our knowledge and those of paras 12 to 14 of the plaint are
true on the basis of information received and believed to be
true. Last para is a prayer and submissions before this Hon’ble
Court.

Plaintiffs
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SHAHDARA): KKD: DELHI

SUIT NO. /2017

In Re:-

Smt. Sonia Devi & Anr. …Plaintiffs

Versus

Smt. Ritu Sharda & Ors. …Defendants

AFFIDAVIT

I, Sonia Devi W/o Sh. Vijay Kumar Sharda R/o A – 166, Brij
Vihar, Ghaziabad, U.P. 201011, do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare as under:

1. That the deponent is the plaintiff No.1 in the above noted suit
and, therefore, is well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the present case and is also competent to
swear this affidavit on oath.

2. That the deponent has filed the accompanying suit and the
contents of the same have been read over and explained to
the deponent in vernacular and he has understood the same
to be true and correct and the contents of the same are not
being repeated herein for the sake of brevity and the same
may kindly be treated as part and parcel of this affidavit.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:

I, the above named deponent do hereby state on solemn

affirmation that the contents of para 1 and 2 of the aforesaid
affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing material has been kept concealed there from.

Verified at Delhi on this day of 2017.

DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SHAHDARA): KKD: DELHI

SUIT NO. /2017

In Re:-

Smt. Sonia Devi & Anr. …Plaintiffs

Versus

Smt. Ritu Sharda & Ors. …Defendants

AFFIDAVIT

I, Rituraj Sharda S/o Sh. Vijay Kumar Sharda R/o A – 166,

Brij Vihar, Ghaziabad, U.P. 201011, do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare as under:

1. That the deponent is the plaintiff No.2 in the above noted suit
and, therefore, is well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the present case and is also competent to
swear this affidavit on oath.

2. That the deponent has filed the accompanying suit and the
contents of the same have been read over and explained to
the deponent in vernacular and he has understood the same
to be true and correct and the contents of the same are not
being repeated herein for the sake of brevity and the same
may kindly be treated as part and parcel of this affidavit.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:

I, the above named deponent do hereby state on solemn

affirmation that the contents of para 1 and 2 of the aforesaid
affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing material has been kept concealed there from.

Verified at Delhi on this day of 2017.

DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SHAHDARA): KKD: DELHI

SUIT NO. /2017

In Re:-

Smt. Sonia Devi & Anr. …Plaintiffs

Versus

Smt. Ritu Sharda & Ors. …Defendants

APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 & 2 READ WITH SEC. 151

C.P.C. ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the plaintiffs have filed the accompanying suit for

permanent injunction against the defendants, the contents of

the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this

application which are not being repeated herein for the sake of

brevity.

2. That the applicants / plaintiffs have a good prima facie case in

their favour and against the defendants and the suit is most

likely to be decreed.

3. That the balance of convenience also lies in favour of the

plaintiffs and against the defendants.

4. That the plaintiffs will suffer an irreparable loss and injury in

case, the ex parte ad interim injunction is not granted to the

applicants / plaintiffs against the defendants thereby

restraining the defendants from transferring / creating any

 third party interest in the suit premises to any other person till

the decision of the suit.

5. That the present suit is a fit case where the interim relief

should be granted in the interest of justice.

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that an ex-parte Ad-

interim injunction order may kindly be passed in favour of the

plaintiffs and against the defendants thereby restraining the

defendants, their associates, representatives, heirs and

attorneys, etc. from entering, visiting the house of the

plaintiffs, daughter of the plaintiff no.1 and / or creating

hindrance in peaceful enjoyment, ingress, outgress of house of

plaintiffs, i.e., A – 166, Brij Vihar, Ghaziabad, U.P. 201011

and / or that of daughter of the plaintiff no.1, i.e., Q - 28,

Naveen Shahdara, Delhi - 110032.

Any other order(s) which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and

proper may also be passed in favour of the applicant against the

defendant.

Applicants / Plaintiffs
Through

Delhi (MRIDUL JAIN)

Dated: Advocate
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SHAHDARA): KKD: DELHI

SUIT NO. /2017

In Re:-

Smt. Sonia Devi & Anr. …Plaintiffs

Versus

Smt. Ritu Sharda & Ors. …Defendants

AFFIDAVIT

I, Sonia Devi W/o Sh. Vijay Kumar Sharda R/o A – 166, Brij
Vihar, Ghaziabad, U.P. 201011, do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare as under:

1. That the deponent is the plaintiff No.1 in the above noted suit
and, therefore, is well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the present case and is also competent to
swear this affidavit on oath.

2. That the deponent has filed the accompanying application and

the contents of the same have been read over and explained
to the deponent in vernacular and he has understood the
same to be true and correct and the contents of the same are
not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity and the
same may kindly be treated as part and parcel of this
affidavit.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:

I, the above named deponent do hereby state on solemn

affirmation that the contents of para 1 and 2 of the aforesaid
affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing material has been kept concealed there from.

Verified at Delhi on this day of 2017.

DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SHAHDARA): KKD: DELHI

SUIT NO. /2017

In Re:-

Smt. Sonia Devi & Anr. …Plaintiffs

Versus

Smt. Ritu Sharda & Ors. …Defendants

AFFIDAVIT

I, Rituraj Sharda S/o Sh. Vijay Kumar Sharda R/o A – 166,

Brij Vihar, Ghaziabad, U.P. 201011, do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare as under:

3. That the deponent is the plaintiff No.2 in the above noted suit
and, therefore, is well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the present case and is also competent to
swear this affidavit on oath.

4. That the deponent has filed the accompanying application and

the contents of the same have been read over and explained
to the deponent in vernacular and he has understood the
same to be true and correct and the contents of the same are
not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity and the
same may kindly be treated as part and parcel of this
affidavit.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:

I, the above named deponent do hereby state on solemn

affirmation that the contents of para 1 and 2 of the aforesaid
affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing material has been kept concealed there from.

Verified at Delhi on this day of 2017.

DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SHAHDARA): KKD: DELHI

SUIT NO. /2017

In Re:-

Smt. Sonia Devi & Anr. …Plaintiffs

Versus

Smt. Ritu Sharda & Ors. …Defendants

ADDRESS FORM

1. Smt. Sonia Devi

W/o Sh. Vijay Kumar Sharda
2. Sh. Rituraj Sharda
S/o Sh. Vijay Kumar Sharda
Both R/o A – 166, Brij Vihar,
Ghaziabad, U.P. 201011. …Plaintiffs

Versus

1. Smt. Ritu Sharda

W/o Sh. Vikas Sharda
R/o E 110, 2nd Floor, Jhilmil Colony,
Delhi - 110095
2. Sh. Shri Krishan Aggarwal
3. Smt. Usha Aggarwal
W/o Sh. Shri Krishan Aggarwal
Both R/o 7/275, Jain Mandir Gali,
Farsh Bazar, Shahdara, Delhi 110032. …Defendants

Plaintiffs
Through

Delhi. (MRIDUL JAIN)

Dated: Advocate
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE (SHAHDARA): KKD: DELHI

SUIT NO. /2017

In Re:-

Smt. Sonia Devi & Anr. …Plaintiffs

Versus

Smt. Ritu Sharda & Ors. …Defendants

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE PLAINTIFFS

S.No. Particulars Pg.No.

1. Letter dated 26.09.2001 to the SSP, GZB.

2. Postal Receipts

3. Affidavit dated 26.09.2001

4. Dainik Jagran Newspaper dated 30.09.2001

5. Complaint to SHO PS Vivek Vihar

6. Complaint to Chowki Incharge Radhakunj Chowki

Plaintiffs

Through

Delhi (MRIDUL JAIN)

Dated: Advocate