Javaid (w

IN THE COURT OF MR. NADEEM KHIZAR RANJH, CIVIL JUDGE, MULTAN.

Javaid Ali Shah

Vs.

Zia Shahid etc.

SUIT FOR DAMAGES. WRITTEN STATEMENT.

Respectfully Sheweth: Preliminary Objections: 1.

That the plaintiff has no cause of action to file the suit against defendants.

2.

That the plaintiff has no locus standi to file a suit for damages in respect of defamation .

3.

That the plaintiff never contacted with the defendants for filing a counter version and to deny the news published so being waiver of right cannot claim any damages.

4.

That no prior notice is given to the defendants before filing this suit.

5.

That the suit is filed on the wrong facts and liable to dismiss on the same ground.

6.

That the suit was filed after about six months of publishing the news item, so at this belated stage, the plaintiff cannot file the suit on the pretext of defamation.

7.

That the defendants are entitled for special cost under section 35-A C.P.C.

ON MERITS: 1.

That the contents of para No. 1 are admitted upto the extent that the plaintiff was posted as S.P. (C.I.A.) sometime at Multan, but the remaining para is not admitted to be correct because some of the contents are related to the personal abilities/qualities of the plaintiff and others are related to the departmental matters of the plaintiff. However, the plaintiff spent some period of his service at Multan and there are so many matters related with the plaintiff.

2.

That the contents of para No. 2 have no need to comment, because the news item was brought by the respondent No. 2 in discharge of his duties. However, plaintiff did not approach the respondent No. 1 for clarification or to refute/deny the news item.

3.

That the contents of para No. 3 are incorrect. Only allegations are levelled against the defendants without substantiating the plea taken by the plaintiff.

4.

That the contents of para No. 4 are mostly incorrect and for the remaining para, there is no need to reply, because that relates to the personal abilities/qualities of the plaintiff.

5.

That the contents of para No. 5 are incorrect. Neither the plaintiff came forward to refuse or deny the news item published nor he sent any clarification to the defendants.

6.

That the contents of para No. 6 are incorrect. Plaintiff has no cause of action against the defendants.

7.

That the contents of para No. 7 are legal.

8.

That the contents of para No. 8 are legal.

Keeping

in

view

the

above-mentioned

circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that the suit in hand may please be dismissed with costs. Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit, may also be extended in the interest of justice. Humble Respondents, Dated: _______ Through: S.M. Shakeel Haider, Advocate High Court, 135-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176

Verification: Verified on oath at Multan this ____ day of September 2002 that the contents of the above-titled written statement are true and correct to the extent of our knowledge and belief. Defendants