IN THE COURT OF MS.
VIJETA SINGH RAWAT, HON’BLE ADJ
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS NO. 54 OF 2021
In the matter of:
M/s NEHA GARMENTS PVT LTD. …Plaintiff
Vs.
M/s MIST DIRECT SALES PVT. LTD. …Defendant
INDEX
Sl. No. Particulars Page No.
1. Replication on behalf of the Plaintiff to the Written
Statement filed by the Defendant alongwith Affidavit in
support.
2. Application under Order VII Rule (14) of CPC, 1908 for
filing of additional documents alongwith Affidavit in
support.
3. Affidavit under section 65B of Indian Evidence Act
New Delhi
Dated: 09.2022
Prateek & Luv Manan
Counsels for Plaintiff
CH. No. 242-243 Patiala House Courts,
New Delhi
Email: Prateeklegal7@[Link]
Tel. No. 9871680565; 9910070888
IN THE COURT OF MS. VIJETA SINGH RAWAT, HON’BLE ADJ
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS NO. 54 OF 2021
In the matter of:
M/s NEHA GARMENTS PVT LTD. …Plaintiff
Vs.
M/s MIST DIRECT SALES PVT. LTD. …Defendant
REPLICATION FILED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF TO THE
WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANT ALONGWITH
AFFIDAVIT
At the outset the Plaintiffs denies all the allegations as have been made by the
Defendant in the written statement. That the plaintiff is raising the following
objections by way of Preliminary objections: -
Most respectfully showeth:
Preliminary Objections to the Written Statement:
1. That the written statement has not been signed on every page and not
properly verified in accordance with law. A bare perusal of the verification
would evince that the same is not as per the Hon’ble High Court rules as
well as per Order VI Rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
2. That the affidavit as has been appended alongwith the Written Statement is
further not as per the covenants of law, and thus the pleadings not being
verified and appended with a proper affidavit merit to be returned to be
presented properly as per Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908.
3. Contents of Written Statement are wrong and as such denied. It is wrong to
state that the suit filed by the plaintiff is an abuse of process of court or that
any particulars have been concealed or misrepresented before this Hon’ble
Court, it is also incorrect that the plaintiff has made false and frivolous
allegations and concocted stories. It is also incorrect that the plaintiff has
made out a false and frivolous case against the defendants under the
fragment of imagination. All these allegations are baseless and mere bald
assertions. The case filed by the plaintiff is based on the documents and
communications which have been filed along with the plaint and relied
upon by the plaintiff.
Reply to Preliminary Objections: -
A. Contents of Para A of preliminary objections is denied being wrong and
incorrect. The present suit establishes the cause action arises against Defendant
being in default of releasing the legitimate payment to the Plaintiff. Contents of
submission made in the present suit be read as part and parcel herein the same
are not being repeated for the sake of brevity. The Invoices as issued by the
Plaintiff establishes cause of action in favour of plaintiff and default of
payment by Defendant.
B. Contents of Para B are wrong and incorrect, hence vehemently denied. It is
pertinent to mention that the plaintiff company is the parent company of M/s
Global Power India. It is pertinent to mention that M/s Global Power India is a
unit of M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd., and both the companies pertains same
GSTIN no. i.e. 09AACCN3745J1Z8 and is considered to be as group of
companies. Further, the Invoices raised by M/s Global Power India mentions
that it is a unit of M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd. It is pertinent to mention that
the directors of both M/s Global Power India and M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd.
are same persons. Hence, it is an admitted fact by the Defendant at the time of
placing work order.
C. Contents of Para C are wrong and incorrect, hence denied. It is also incorrect
that the plaintiff has made out a false and frivolous case against the defendants.
The case filed by the plaintiff is based on the documents and communications
which have been exchanged between the plaintiff and defendant.
D. Contents of Para D are wrong and incorrect, hence denied. It is pertinent to
mention that the Defendant company had placed work order dated 04.08.2018
in the name of M/s Global Power India, wherein it was mentioned “a unit of
M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd”. Further the invoices as raised in the name of
M/s Global Power India, wherein it is clearly mentioned “a unit of M/s Neha
Garments Pvt. Ltd.” i.e. the Plaintiff company. Therefore, as per the doctrine
of ‘group of companies’ and ‘composite transactions’ M/s Global Power India
and M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd. are of the same group and directors, and M/s
Global Power is a unit of M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd. It is pertinent to
mention that Mr. Shailendra Brijronia (______) of Defendant company had
issued the work order dated 04.08.2018 from his personal email id i.e.
[Link]@[Link] on 08.08.2018 to ngplnoida@[Link].
In the said email Mr. Arvind of Defendant company was also marked. It is
pertinent to mention that the email Id on which work order was placed i.e.
ngplnoida@[Link] is of Plaintiff company i.e. M/s Neha Garments Pvt.
Ltd. Hence, it is an admitted fact by the Defendant that the work order was
placed to M/s Global Power India which is a subsidiary unit of M/s Neha
Garments Pvt. Ltd.
E. Contents of Para E are wrong and incorrect, hence vehemently denied. As
explained above the M/s Global Power India is a subsidiary unit of M/s Neha
Garments Pvt. Ltd and is considered to be a group of companies. Further as per
Section 20 (a) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 states that: -
“20. Other suits to be instituted where defendants reside or cause of
action arises – Subject to the limitations aforesaid, every suit shall be
instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction-
a. the defendant, or each of the defendants where there are more
than one, at the time of commencement of the suit, actually
and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally
works for gain, or…”
In the present case, the Defendant herein carries on business within the local
jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Hence, the present court has complete
jurisdiction to try the present suit.
F. Contents of Para F are wrong and incorrect, hence vehemently denied. It is
incorrect that this Hon’ble Court has no territorial jurisdiction to try and
entertain the present suit. As explained above at length the Defendant herein is
having its registered office at – Garage no.11, Gole Market, New Delhi-
110001. The said fact is also established from Defendant Company Master
Data which is available with Registrar of Companies, Ministry of Corporate
Affairs, wherein the registered office of the Defendant company is same as
mentioned above. Therefore, the present suit is with in the territorial
jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court and is completely maintainable.
G. Contents of Para G are wrong and incorrect, hence denied. It is completely
incorrect to suggest that the present suit is not maintainable. As explained
above at length the Plaintiff is parent company of M/s Global Power India, and
the Defendant company had placed work order to M/s Global Power India
which is a subsidiary unit of M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd., and are considered
to be a group of companies. Submissions made be read as part and parcel
herein.
H. Contents of Para H are wrong and denied. The Work order dated 04.08.2018
was issued by Defendant company vide email dated 08.08.2018 to the Plaintiff
Company. Submissions made above in Para D be read as part and parcel
herein. It is completely wrong and incorrect that the said document is
fabricated.
REJOINDER TO PARA WISE REPLY:
1. Contents of Para 1 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 1 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The denial made by the
Defendant to the averments of the Plaintiff is vague and does not constitute a
valid denial.
2. Contents of Para 2 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 2 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The denial made by the
Defendant to the averments of the Plaintiff is vague and does not constitute a
valid denial.
3. Contents of Para 3 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 3 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. It is incorrect and denied that
plaintiff company has no subsidiary unit under name and title of M/s Global
Power India. As per the principle of group of companies, M/s Global Power
India is a subsidiary unit of M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd. The Defendant while
placing work order mentioned ‘M/s Global Power India, a unit of M/s Neha
Garments Pvt. Ltd’. As per the doctrine of Group of Companies, it completely
establishes that both the companies are under the same group as both M/s Neha
Garments Pvt Ltd. & M/s Global Power India pertains same registration and
GST number, also directors of both the companies are same persons. It is
completely incorrect and denied that M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd. has no
cause of action in its favour. However, all the Invoices as raised were issued
under the same GSTIN number and it clearly mentions that M/s Global Power
India is a unit of M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd. Considering the same the
present suit is completely maintainable in the eyes of law.
4. Contents of Para 4 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 4 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The denial made by the
Defendant to the averments of the Plaintiff is vague and does not constitute a
valid denial. Submission made above in Para D of preliminary objections be
read as part and parcel herein the same are not repeated for the sake of brevity.
It is incorrect and denied that Defendant company has not placed any order of
DG Set 320 KVA (generator). It is incorrect and denied that DG set was not
delivered to the Defendant Company. It is pertinent to mention that on
10.02.2019 the Defendant Company had returned the DG Set 320 KVA
(generator) back to the Plaintiff company, and issued a Non- Returnable Gate
Pass (NRGP) on its own name and title. The said fact clearly establishes that
the DG Set was in the possession of Defendant company and the same was
utilized from 04.08.2018 till 10.02.2019.
5. Contents of Para 5 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 5 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The denial made by the
Defendant to the averments of the Plaintiff is vague and does not constitute a
valid denial. As explained above at length M/s Global Power India is a unit
working under the aegis of M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd. and are under the
same group of companies.
6. Contents of Para 6 are wrong and incorrect, and are contradictory in nature and
the contents of corresponding Para 6 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed.
The Plaintiff herein is making contradictory statements and is misleading this
Hon’ble Court. On one hand its states that no DG set was ever
installed/supplied and on the other hand it states that DG set as
supplied/installed was defective in nature. However, no supported documents
have been placed on record by the Defendant company alongwith its written
statement to support its alleged allegations that the DG set as provided was
faulty in nature. All the averments made by the Defendant company are
completely vague & baseless and without merits.
7. Contents of Para 7 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 7 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The denial made by the
Defendant to the averments of the Plaintiff is vague and does not constitute a
valid denial.
8. Contents of Para 8 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 8 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. It is completely wrong and
incorrect that M/s Global Power India has installed the defective generator at
the site of Defendant Company. It is pertinent to mention that at no point of
time Defendant had ever mentioned that the said generator as installed is
defective in nature. It is completely wrong and incorrect that Defendant
Company had ever paid freight and catering charges to the Plaintiff Company.
It is pertinent to mention that the Plaintiff Company had raised Tax Invoice
bearing no. GPI/009/18-19 on 20.08.2018 amounting to Rs. 66,800/- which
includes hiring charges of Rs. 46,610/- and transportation/freight charges of Rs.
10,000/- respectively. However, the Defendant Company had failed to release
the payment towards the same.
9. Contents of Para 9 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 9 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. It is completely wrong and
incorrect that defendant company had not issued a cheque bearing no. ‘753230’
in favour of M/s Global Power India amounting to Rs. 49,000/-. As explained
in the present suit that the Defendant Company only to evade from its
legitimate liability had lured the Plaintiff and shared photograph of cheque with
the Plaintiff, but the said cheque was never handed over to the Plaintiff. The
Defendant company is to be put under strict proof to disclose the whereabouts
and details of cheque no. ‘753230’ before this Hon’ble Court.
10. Contents of Para 10 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 10 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. It is incorrect to state that the
Plaintiff Company had not issued any reminder to the Defendant company to
the release of payment. It is an admitted fact by the Defendant that M/s Global
Power India, a unit of Plaintiff Company had issued invoices to the Defendant
company, and as explained above at length the both M/s Global Power India
and M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd. are under the same group of companies.
Despite acknowledging the Tax Invoices as raised, the Defendant company had
neither released the legitimate payment to M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd and nor
to M/s Global Power India. It is completely wrong and incorrect that the
Defendant company had ever raised any issue regarding defective DG Set,
however the Defendant Company had utilized the same without paying any
hiring charges to the Plaintiff. It is pertinent to mention that the Plaintiff after
not getting any payment towards the invoices as raised had only requested the
Defendant to return the DG Set. The Defendant had released the DG Set to the
M/s Global Power India (unit of M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd.) on 10.02.2019,
and had issued a Non- Returnable Gate Pass (NRGP).
11. Contents of Para 11 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 11 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The Defendant is put under
strict proof to prove the contents of the same. It is incorrect that Defendant
company had ever paid any sum towards hiring of the DG set. Submissions
made in the above para’s be read as part and parcel herein, the same are not
being repeated for the sake of brevity.
12. Contents of Para 12 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 12 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The Defendant is put under
strict proof to prove the contents of the same. It is completely wrong and
incorrect that Plaintiff had provided defective DG set to the Defendant. It is
only the Defendant company who with malafied intention had failed to release
the legitimate hiring charges towards the DG set. The Defendant had failed to
place on record any document to show that the DG set as supplied/installed by
the Plaintiff was defective in nature, and is merely making bald, vague and
baseless allegations against the Plaintiff only to evade from is legitimate
outstanding dues and to mislead this Hon’ble Court.
13. Contents of Para 13 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 13 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The Defendant is put under
strict proof to prove the contents of the same. The Defendant had utilized the
DG set from 17.08.2018 till 04.02.2019 as supplied/installed by the Plaintiff
and the same was returned only on 10.02.2019. The defendant is liable to pay a
sum of Rs. 3,21,634/- (alongwith interest) for the services rendered of the DG
set.
14. Contents of Para 14 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 14 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The Defendant is put under
strict proof to prove the contents of the same. The Plaintiff had issued a legal
notice on 05.11.2020 to the Defendant to pay a sum of Rs. 3,18,638/-
(alongwith interest), however no response was ever addressed by the Defendant
to the said legal notice. The legal notice and the postal receipt of the same are
filed along with the Plaint itself.
15. Contents of Para 15 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 15 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The Defendant is put under
strict proof to prove the contents of the same. It is completely wrong and
incorrect that Plaintiff was deficient in providing services, however it is the
Defendant who had failed to adhere to the terms of the work order as issued
and had failed to release the payment to the Plaintiff towards the hiring of DG
Set.
16. Contents of Para 16 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 16 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The Defendant is put under
strict proof to prove the contents of the same. Only due to the Defendant failure
in releasing the payment towards hiring charges the Plaintiff left with no other
alternative apart from filing of the present suit. The denial made by the
Defendant to the averments of the Plaintiff is vague and does not constitute a
valid denial.
17. Contents of Para 17 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 17 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The Defendant is put under
strict proof to prove the contents of the same. The denial made by the
Defendant to the averments of the Plaintiff is vague and does not constitute a
valid denial. It is also incorrect that the plaintiff has made out a false and
frivolous case against the defendants under the fragment of imagination and
with malafied intentions. All these allegations are baseless and mere bald
assertions. The case filed by the plaintiff is based on the documents and
communications which have been filed along with the plaint and relied upon by
the plaintiff. The Defendant is liable to pay for the services provided by the
plaintiff.
18. Contents of Para 18 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 18 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The Defendant is put under
strict proof to prove the contents of the same.
19. Contents of Para 19 are matter of fact and record. The contents of
corresponding Para 19 of the Plaint are reiterated and reaffirmed.
20. Contents of Para 20 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 20 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. Submissions made above be
read as part and parcel herein.
21. Contents of Para 21 are wrong and denied and the contents of corresponding
Para 21 of the Plaint is reiterated and reaffirmed. The Defendant is put under
strict proof to prove the contents of the same. The Defendant is liable to make
the legitimate payment towards the hiring of DG set and services provided by
the Plaintiff.
22. Contents of Para 22 stated to be matter of record, and no specific reply is
addressed by the Defendant. The contents of corresponding Para 22 of the
Plaint are reiterated and reaffirmed. The Defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs.
3,18,638.00/- alongwith interest @24% p.a. to the Plaintiff for the services
rendered.
23. Contents of Para 23 are neither replied nor dealt by the Defendant. The
contents of corresponding Para 23 of the Plaint are reiterated and reaffirmed.
24. The last para is prayer to this Hon’ble Court, contents of which are wrong and
incorrect. It is submitted that the defendant is not entitled to any relief much
less as prayed for in the suit from Plaintiff. It is pertinent to mention that the
Defendant had neither rejected the Plaintiff prayer as prayed nor responded the
same. As per order Order VIII Rule 3, any denial which is not specific is
deemed to be admitted. The defendant herein had neither refuted nor denied the
prayer as prayed by the Plaintiff, therefore all the Prayer as prayed by the
Plaintiff in the present suit are deemed to be admitted.
25. In light of the same, the Hon’ble Court may be pleased pass a decree in favour
of the Plaintiff and against defendant, directing the Defendant to release a
payment of Rs. 3,18,638.00/- alongwith interest @24% p.a. from 04.02.2019
till realization of the same.
Plaintiff
Noida
Dated: 09.2022
Prateek & Luv Manan
Counsels for Plaintiff
CH. No. 242-243 Patiala House Courts,
New Delhi-110001
Email: Prateeklegal@[Link]
Tel. No. 9871680565
VERIFICATION:
Verified at Noida on this ___ day of September, 2022 that the contents of
para’s preliminary submissions and objections, and those of paras of reply on
merits are true and correct to the best of my information and belief.
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF MS. VIJETA SINGH RAWAT, HON’BLE ADJ
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS NO. 54 OF 2021
In the matter of:
M/s NEHA GARMENTS PVT LTD. …Plaintiff
Vs.
M/s MIST DIRECT SALES PVT. LTD. …Defendant
AFFIDAVIT
I, Suman Yadav, W/o Sh. Krishan Yadav, aged about 56 years, R/o Q-222, Sector-21,
Noida, GB Nagar, UP-201301, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
I the above-named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under: -
1. That I am the director of the Plaintiff company in the above-
mentioned suit and I am fully aware of the facts of the case and thus
competent to swear this affidavit, and hence depose the same.
2. That I have read the contents of the accompanying Replication
which has been drafted by my Counsel under my instructions. The
statement of facts contained therein are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge derived from the records. The contents of the same have been
explained to me in vernacular language and I understood the same. The
submissions made therein are correct on basis of information received and
believed to be true.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified that the contents of paras 1 and 2 above are correct to my knowledge
and nothing material has been concealed there from.
Verified at Noida on this ___th day of September 2022
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF MS. VIJETA SINGH RAWAT, HON’BLE ADJ
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS NO. 54 OF 2021
In the matter of:
M/s NEHA GARMENTS PVT LTD. …Plaintiff
Vs.
M/s MIST DIRECT SALES PVT. LTD. …Defendant
APPLICATION UNDER ORDER VII RULE 14 READ WITH SECTION
151 OF CPC, 1908 ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF: -
1. That the present case is pending for adjudication before this Hon’ble court
and next date of hearing is 15.09.2022.
2. That the applicant/Plaintiff was unable to file certain documents along with
the plaint as the defendant has taken a vague and baseless defence in respect
of the maintainability of suit and admissibility of Plaintiff Company. The
plaintiff could not file the said documents on an earlier stage as the same
were untraceable.
3. That the Plaintiff Company is the parent company and M/s Global Power
India is a subsidiary unit of the plaintiff company. The GST certificate
reflects that both M/s Global Power India and M/s Neha Garments Pvt Ltd.
are running under the same GST number and having same
directors/Managerial persons. Copy of GST Certificate in the name of
Plaintiff Company and M/s Global Power India is annexed hereto as
Annexure A1.
4. That it is pertinent to mention that the defence taken by the defendant
company stating that the Work Order issued by the Plaintiff Company is a
fabricated and unsigned document is completely baseless and frivolous in
nature. It is to be noted that Mr Shailendra Brijronia (__________) of
Defendant Company had issued Work Order dated 4.08.2018 from his
personal email Id i.e [Link]@[Link] on 08.08.2018 to
M/s Global Power India a unit of M/s Neha Garments Pvt. Ltd at
ngplnoida@[Link] and the said email was also marked to Mr. Arvind of
the defendant company. Hence, it is an admitted fact that M/s Global Power
India is a subsidiary unit of Plaintiff Company which was duly
acknowledge by the Defendant. Copy of email dated 08.08.2018 issued by
defendant representative placing work order to the Plaintiff Company is
annexed hereto as Annexure A2.
5. It is pertinent to mention that the Defendant company had released the DG
Set of the Plaintiff on 10.02.2019 and had issued a Non- Returnable Gate
Pass (NRGP) to the Plaintiff company. The said document establishes that
the defendant company had utilized the DG Set till 10.02.2019. Copy of
Non-returnable gate pass is annexed hereto as Annexure A3.
6. That it is pleaded that the present documents are very important in nature
for the fair and just adjudication of the present suit and therefore the same
shall be taken on record.
PRAYER
i. It is prayed to this Hon’ble Court to kindly consider these documents
and take the documents filed with the present application on record
in the interest of justice.
ii. Any other relief/order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper
in the circumstances of the case may also be granted/passed in favour
of Plaintiff and against the defendant.
Plaintiff
Noida
Dated: 09.2022
Prateek & Luv Manan
Counsels for Plaintiff
CH. No. 242-243 Patiala House Courts,
New Delhi-110001
Email: Prateeklegal@[Link]
Tel. No. 9871680565
IN THE COURT OF MS. VIJETA SINGH RAWAT, HON’BLE ADJ
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS NO. 54 OF 2021
In the matter of:
M/s NEHA GARMENTS PVT LTD. …Plaintiff
Vs.
M/s MIST DIRECT SALES PVT. LTD. …Defendant
AFFIDAVIT
I, Suman Yadav, W/o Sh. Krishan Yadav, aged about 56 years, R/o Q-222, Sector-21,
Noida, GB Nagar, UP-201301, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
I the above-named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under: -
1. That I am the director of the Plaintiff company in the above-
mentioned suit and I am fully aware of the facts of the case and thus
competent to swear this affidavit, and hence depose the same.
2. That I have read the contents of the accompanying Replication
which has been drafted by my Counsel under my instructions. The
statement of facts contained therein are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge derived from the records. The contents of the same have been
explained to me in vernacular language and I understood the same. The
submissions made therein are correct on basis of information received and
believed to be true.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified that the contents of paras 1 and 2 above are correct to my knowledge
and nothing material has been concealed there from.
Verified at Noida on this ___th day of September, 2022
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF MS. VIJETA SINGH RAWAT, HON’BLE ADJ
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS NO. 54 OF 2021
In the matter of:
M/s NEHA GARMENTS PVT LTD. …Plaintiff
Vs.
M/s MIST DIRECT SALES PVT. LTD. …Defendant
AFFIDVIT UNDER 65B OF THE EVIDENCE ACT
I, Suman Yadav, W/o Sh. Krishan Yadav, aged about 56 years, R/o Q-222, Sector-21,
Noida, GB Nagar, UP-201301, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1. That I am the Director of the plaintiff company in the above-mentioned case and I
am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the above captioned case and
therefore competent to swear the present Affidavit.
2. That the Copy of Emails placed on record, which were sent by the Defendant to the
Plaintiff on 08.08.2018 for placing work order for DG Generator Set, are true and
unadulterated copies of the original E-mails sent. The computers used for
authorizing the E-Mails were in perfect condition at the time of compiling the E-
mails placed on record. The true copies of the E-Mails are downloaded from the
aforesaid computers. The submission made therein are correct, true and best to my
knowledge and belief.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified that the contents of paras 1 to 2 above are correct to my knowledge and
nothing material has been concealed there from
Verified at Noida on this the day of September 2022.
DEPONENT
