Scribd Logo
Fazer o upload

Bem-vindo(a) ao Scribd!

  • Annexure 2 - Kailash Satyarthi's Reply To Petition Under Section 92

    Enviado por

    Sheotaj Singh
    262 visualizações26 páginas
    Annexure 2 - Kailash Satyarthi’s reply to petition under Section 92

    Título original

    Annexure 2 - Kailash Satyarthi’s reply to petition under Section 92

    Direitos autorais

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formatos disponíveis

    PDF ou leia online no Scribd

    Você considera este documento útil?

    Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

    Denunciar este documento
    Annexure 2 - Kailash Satyarthi’s reply to petition under Section 92

    Direitos autorais:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Baixe no formato PDF ou leia online no Scribd
    Sinalizar o conteúdo como inadequado
    262 visualizações26 páginas

    Annexure 2 - Kailash Satyarthi's Reply To Petition Under Section 92

    Enviado por

    Sheotaj Singh
    Annexure 2 - Kailash Satyarthi’s reply to petition under Section 92

    Direitos autorais:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Baixe no formato PDF ou leia online no Scribd
    Sinalizar o conteúdo como inadequado
    de 26
    IN THE COURT OF SHRI B.S.CHOUDHARY, A.D.J. DELHY SUIT NO.32 OF 1997 In the matter of + Sheotaj Singh & Ors. - Plaintiff Kailash Satyarthi & Ors -Defendants, WRITTEN STATEMENT AND COUNTER CLAIM UNDER ORDER 6A OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE ON BEHALF OF Di 1 AND 2. The Defendant no.i and 2 most respectfully showeth: PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS 1. That the present suit has been filed without any cat action hence the suit is liable to be rejected under Orde 11 of C.P.c. 2. That the Plaintiff has no lecus suit as Plaintiff no,.1, 2, 3 and $ are no more the t Mukti Pratishthan (Trust). Plaintiff no.5 is not repre: anyone as clear from the title of the suit, thereotre, | is liable to be resected, 5. That the Plaintiffs have not cone to the Court hands and have not stated the true”and actual fects suit deserves dismissal on this ground also. 4. That thye suit does not fall under section 92 of . the same is filed to protect the inetreste of the pl individually. The sult 4s neither in the interest of publi in the. Trust.The Plaintit¥s have failed to ive any Ieiettree af srdech of crust ditheretera@iehe=ic 15 dismissed 1. In reply to para i of the plaint the answering de submit that the mukts PratishLhen is a chariteble trust oe the settler trustees including answering defendants vic bead tated 143028 wntining Sts regiatered offi a8 7s Sate Mate ony Ben Te ren totam of the Fra 2. Mrs. Sumedha 3. Shri Vithal Rao 4. Shri R-L.Tiward Shri Rajendra Tyagi 2. That the contents of para 2 of the plaint are admit 3. That in reply to para S of the plaint the defendants submit that it is correct that the trust Uonation or otherwise since Januar Tnterests and conduct ef the Plain Node a That in reply to para 4 of the plaint the efendants submit’ that it is correct to the Plaintiff no.1,2 and 3 have been coopted as trust resolution dated 11.7.1994 and 27.98.1994. The Plaintiff n “3 and 4 are no more tim trustees of the Trust. The 7 do not permit any sort of affiliation , membership or 2 of any trustees with a political party. Mukti Pratishtan is a Registered Charitable Trust and also registered under Foreign Contribution Regulation Act under the Home Ministry, which is very strict about the political involvements of the Trust and the Trustees. While joining the Trust the Plaintiff no. 1,2end 3 concealed their political affiliations with the different political parties. The Plaintiff no-1, 2 and % in collusion with their mentor Swami Agnivesh. a political figure and an Arya Samaj Leader started putting pressure to grab the movable and immovable properties of the trust, Plaintiff no.1 has written 2 letter dated 27.12.1994 to the funding agency without the consent and approval of the trust members, the same is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE “A’. The funding agency novib addressed a 11999 wherein the contents of lewtter dated letter dated 18. 27742-1994 wowre mentioned/referred. This letter which is annexed herein as ANNEXURE °B’ shows that how Plaintiff a. worked against the interest of the Trust and committed breach of trust. Other Plaintiffs i.e. no.2 and 3 also supported him in this respect. Plaintiff no.1 is one of the executive member of a political party known as ‘Arya Gabha’ started by Swami Agnivesh.A photocopy of the news paper cutting of THE HINDUSTAN TIMES dated 25.11.1994 is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE °C’ which shows the ‘floating of political party ‘Arya Sabha’. In another newspaps cutting pf DAINTK JAGRAN dated 10.7.1994 which is marked ANNEXURE .°D' shous the name of Plaintiff no.1 as member of Arya Sabha. L Pleigeitt noni, 2° and S have, alec) net's Tul¢s].mdiae requirenentiaf depositing Re-9000/- in cash or in Kind within sim a ecathe of Joining theltrust. (The) resolltion dated S:18s0ies marked hereto ae ANNEXURE °E’ put a condition that a trustee mune deposit trust fee amounting to Rx.9800/- in cash or in kind within six sonths of joining the Trust othernise trustesship would. be nullified.The Secretary Trustee is defendent Novi had asked’ Plaintitt no. i72 cond Soto give up thelr pelle affiliations and/or involvenents/liesions with various political parties and to deposit the menbership fee through letter dated 25.2.1995 , the same is marked as ANNEXURE F, Fi AND F2. several reainders were also sent to them but of no avail. Ultimately @ meeting of the trustees was called on but Plaintift po.t,2 and 3 neither attended the meeting the meeting nor intoreed the reason of their absence, The issue of thadt political involvement was discussed in the meeting and en finding gufficient evidence of their political involvements with various parties, it was so stressed that they have ne moral or legal ground to remain as trustees of the Trust-The Board of Trustees wae left with no other option but to disqualify then from the Trust, The minites of the meeting dated 4.3.1975 is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE “G'. The decision was also communicated to the Plaintiff no.1, 2 and 3, Plaintiff np. also participated and signed the proceeding as others. S. That’ the contents of para 8 of the plaint are wrong and denied. It is not correct that the practical activities of the Trust amona other functions include mainly and primarily running of centre for vocational training of freed honded labourers in Village Ibrahimpur in Delhi functioning under the name and style of Mukti Pratishthan. Infact, Mukti Ashram land was purchased only in the year 199@ whereas the Trust was set up in i992. The land of Mukti Ashram was purchased for Rs. 1,80,00/- by local donations through building up a centre for vocational training and rehabilitation of frred bonded labourers and child Labour. Mukti pratishthan in thebegining was net having any practical field / field activity other than Bandhua Mukti Morcha (BMM). RM has been endorsed on the main project , the front organisation of Mukti Pratishthan. It was headed by Swami fgnivesh and defendant not together with a larce number of social workers. BYM had no staff, Office etc seperate or independent from Mukti Pratishthan as it was the core activity of the latter. All the budget and expenses incurred were discussed An “the BHM meeting were nothing but the budget and expenses of Hukth Pratisnthan. Plaintiff novi was also deeply involved in all these affairs as the private securetary of Swami Agnivesh and then for sone years as general Secretary of BHM. Unfortunately and ironically Swami Agnivesh diverted his interest concern and time to fulfil bis political ambition. Swami decided to go in more for political activities whereas Defendant no-1 decided to choose sone constructive way for helping the children from bondage. There were ample proots that the answering defendant no. 1 and 2 alongwith their group had worked day and night to colect local donation to buy a piece of land and then the land of Mukti The resolution in this Aghram was purchased for Rs, 1,00,000/ respect is marked as ANNEXURE “H + ‘That contents of para & of the plaint are wrong and specifically denied. That only defendant no.t and 3 have been operating the bank account after the induction of Plaintiffs in thm Béard of trustees: Tafact, [t has comes to the note sn answering defendants that Plaintitt novi has also operated the bank account with Defendant no.3 as the Co signatory prior to Gisqualitication. Infact, the present suit is filed in collusion with defendant no.s and with malafide intention he has been pleaded as defendant in the plaint. 7. That contents of para of the plaint ere felse and Uawed on concocted allegations and are thus wrong and denied. Infact, the Plaintitt no.4 did not Join earlier the Trust at the time when Plaintiff ne.1,2 and S were coopted and disqualified. Plaintitt no-4}was coopted in the Trust way back on 12.2.1995 and remianed active in all the activities of the trust until he gracefutly restgnes trom the irust on 24.0.1995 . The resignation letter dated 24,9.1995 {9 marked os AMEXURE “T° herein and née resignation was endorsed in meeting held on the same day i.e 24,8-1995, the same marked as ANMEXURE °J'. The entire para as stated is vague and denied, The Plaintitt have not disclosed the name of the employee through whom they came to know the enbexzlenent of huwe anount belonging to the Trust. Tt is dented that false account han been maintained by the answering defendants. tt 4s not clear trom the Plaint what material in the Trust property of Mukti Ashram has been alienated. No breach of trust has been committed by the ansvering defendants. 8. That the contents of para 8 are totally false, malatide and defamatory in nature hance wrong and ddenied. As a matter of fact the trust has kept all the accounts intact and uptodate and has maintained them in a clear manner. Before audit the accounts have been regularly checked and scrutinised by the internal auditor i.e. defendant no.3 . The accounts were regularly and duly audited by statutory Chartered Accountant appointed by the Trust. The accounts were also regularly submitted to various donor agencies on time alongwoith ether activity report. The trust never failed to submit the audited account to income tax and FCRA Deptt. under the Home Ministry. FORA form could not be submitted only for the year 1994-1995 as all the accounts were in possession of the Plaintiffs. Director, FCRA has been informed in this respect vide letter dated..... marked as GNNEXURE “K’ AND. ‘L's The final disposal orders have been passed by relevant authorities without any objections. Duly audited FCRA form has been regularly submitted upto date till the introduction of new trustees namely Plaintiff no.1, 2 and 5. The contents of this para is further denied because before joining the trust Plaintiff no.1,2 and S went through all the records and accounts and a resolution has been made on the date of their induction. The income tor return for the year 1990-91 , 1991-92, 1992- 93 and 1993-94 are annexed herewith as ANNEXURE "PL", °P2°, “PS! AND “P4°. The document relating te income and expenditure , balancesheet and notice of demand of income tax for the year 1993-94, 1992-95, 1992-91 and 1991-98 ie annexed as ANNEXURE “PB", "PG", “PT” AND “PRY. a The contents of para 9 of the plaint are baseless and Natelkgsas ere. cng jatiel denieeteeseing diemunlivind (aa trustegship the Plaintif? no.i,2 and 3 had no legs) or moral ms intervene in the working of the trust. No such alleged enquiry was ever conducted by the Plaintitts. The Plaintitts have mentioned the so called enquiry Just to fulfsi their dubious interests, This fraud was made only to esteblish their authority alee ape mi case fore (eee Teter ieee ee ie ores 7 a trust. It is not clear who has authorised Plaintitt no.1 to conductr the alleged enquiry 10, That contents of para 1@ of the plaint are wrong and denied. The answering defendant were not aware of the proceedings of the enquiry. Plaintiff no. himself appointed him as the enquiry officer without any authority and conducted the illegal enquiry, though denied, if at sll it was conducted. Contents of this Subpara is vague and denied. No false accéunt ig maintained pertaining to the expenses of the Mukti Ashram. II. Contents of this para are false, malafide and defamatory and hence denied. Tt is denied that major part of the Trust money has been spent by the Getendant Trustees esther on tereign trips and other luxuries or have been embezzled by way of falsification of accounts. It is further denied that forged and false aceaunmts have been prepared . The abovementioned and outgoing paras of the WS clarify that no false and forged accounts were maintained. On the other hand plaintiffs illegally retained the account for the year 1994-95 and dig not allow the Irustees to submit the returns before the concerned authorities. Thus it is the Plaintiffs who have committed breach of trust and manupulation of accounts lying at the Jantar Mantar Office of the Trust. III. ~The contents of this sub para are wronmg and denied. It is absolutely false that any fund assets or property has been transferred to any other society, trust or individual. The Association Of Voluntary Action (AVA) is not a trust with answering defendants. AVA is a regd. charitable society registered under the Society Act on 8,11.1979, three years before the formation of Mukti Pratishthan. The defendant no.1 is honrary member whereas the defendant no.Z is executive member of the Trust. Mr-Ramesh Gupta, Advocate and former president of New Delhi Bar Association is the President of said AVA. AVA is running a trnsitory rehabilitation centre fer freed bonded. “Ehildren as one of its project as a tenant in the land of Mukti Pratishthan. th 1994 all the donor agencies of Mukti Pratishthan led by novib which is having its regional consultancy office at Lucknow, bangalore and Bhuvaneshwar, in their regular monitoring and evaluation found that the political components led by Swami. Agnivesh who was a founder of a new political party named Arya sabha setting up in the Mukti Pratishthan office at 7, danter Nantar Road office, New Delhi. The former decided to stop funding Mukti Pratishthan. Mukti Pratishthan had to face such a big set back due to i11 designs, intenticns and activities of Plaintiff no.i,2 and 3 which resulted in virtual starvation of the miserable poor children staying at Mukti Ashram and ther families of the staff members. Some staff members were compelled ea ru =_— to file tho suit te recover their salaries in the labour court. In such a disastrous situation, Mukti pratishthan contacted various charitable societies to help the children and the stat? members. AVA sgresd to help the children and the staf members in case only if Mukts pratienthan went in for « tenancy agreement” with AVA. This was possible only due to the efforts of defendant No.4. Thus an agreement was entered into between AVA and Mukti Pratinhthen resulting into the construction ef sone better accomodation fer trainees at Mukti Fratishthan land and for Smooth functioning of the training and education and tranaitory rehabilitation ter freed bonded children. The eeeting of the Trust dated 4.5.1995 held in this respect and the_ resolution thereof is already marked as annexure to this written statement. IV. Contents of this sub para is wrong and denied. It is Submitted by the answering defendants and as has also been stated ty the plaintiffs in the plaint, the donation has been coming mainly therough the various doner agencies under the provisions of FORA but hte recepients always had an obligation to sign the Sentract with the donor agencies. defendant no.i being the chiet funetionary under FCRA and the power conferred upon him as the ——__— Secretary Trustees has always sianed the agreement. This agreement also has been endorsed by all the trustees vide resolution dated 11.2.1992 as ANNEXURE °N‘. The Plaintiff nos 48 Well aware of this agreement and Plaintiff no.4 w, sone of the signatory of the aforesaid resolution. The alegation that South Asian Coalition on Child Suryitude (SACS) run by Defendant not which has nothing tu de with the trust is totally false and misleading. SACCS is not an 10 organisation at all. Besides BHM being the main project of the trust, the Trust has initiated other project including SACS: tt nan been resolved in the trust meeting vide resolutian) (agi fa sigea and aarked ANNEXURE “O° that the problen/ (GTaliiagg Se ee: ancane etaemunecat ters of Gadd 1aPNr prevailing tn gouth Avian Countries and in these circunstences /BeCaiaiag teen formed wnich i= a programe like einded NECinai tig pratientnan and Bet had organised the first Gowth Assam)” Saas on child wervitiiie in Naw Deihi i 1987 which gave PiFHD adie pregranae called SACCS. The photocopy of the newspaner in this respect is marked as ANNEXURE "P” AND “0 Vv. The contents of this sub para are totally felse and denied. Tt ie denied that defendant no-1 has transferred trust funds and aceots to the ACCS. In fact SACCS has no seperate constitution + Fegistration or any bank account - 1, The. contents of this sub para are wrong and denied. The piaintit? no.t, 2 and 3 to fulfil their political ambitions end of Swami Agnivesh, unlawfully started creating trouble in the fuuti @ahran project. In this circusstence, the donor sdanaiiige qiied the injunction suit and got the stay. The details] guia came were not turnished to the Plaintiff as they hava teiiiada: right to ask for the same. Uri. The contents of this sub para are false wrong and | Haass: Tt is denied that the defendants by keeping the funding agency in dark have persuaded them to divert the flow.of funds towards ‘the account of other associations. Such allegation is baseless and without any proof. aa VIIT. The contents of this sub para are faise,wrong and denied. Ix, The contents of this sub para are false,wrong and denied. x The contents ef this sub para are false,wrong and denied. The Defendant no. is among the most right activist and is recognised not only in India but also in other countries. he has received many awards and accolations including 1995. Robert.F.Kennedy Human Rights Award , Achener International Peace Prize, the photocopy of the same are annexed as ANNEXURE °R’ AND Ri‘ and the news paper freport are ANNEXURE “S' AND ‘Si". 44. Contents of para 41 are wrong and denied. The alleged enquiry if at all was conducted is biased and conducted with self interest to control the properties of the Trust. Plaintiff not has no right whatsoever ‘to conduct the enquiry. The se called finding of the inquiry is malafide and referred with the “intention to cover up the present suit under section 92 of the (GRse. 42. The contents of this para false , defamatory and hence wrong and denied. The answering defendant has never committed any breach of trust. 15. The contente of thie para are false,urnng and denied. It is: denied that the money of the Trust has been transferred into the SACCS Account. As referred DDA Flats 74, Aravali Apartment was taken on rent. Now the said flat is not in possession of either the Trust of SACCS or the answering defendants. 14. The contents of this para are wrong and denied. The alleged Property 24,0, MIG, Sheikh sarai T stands in the nome of Bap Kaldathe, Rajya Sabha menber of Parliament. The answering defendants are residing there as licences. Neither the Trustnor 12 the answering defendant has any legal_right over the property. Clecnaty Car Avuered Co BUNE: Sa 15. The contents of para 1S are wrong are denied. The defendant ost on behalf of the trust had sent several letters and legat notice to handover the Trust property but they never bethered to reply. The defendants in the Trust had no access to the 7, Jantar Mantar Road office since June, 1994. re (ie. The contents of this para are wrong and denied. Tt is | genied that the answering defndants have converted all the trust property to their own use and enjoying the trust property. On the other hand it is Plaintiffs who are enjoyingh the trust property for their own use 17. Para 17 is just the repetition of the facts as stated in the plaint and the same are wrong and denied. 18. Contents of this para are wrong and denied. It is denied

    Você também pode gostar