IN THE COURT OF LD.
CIVIL JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA
COURT, EAST DISTRICT NEW DELHI.
CIVIL ORIGINAL SUIT No. ___ of 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. Kusum Bansal and Another …Plaintiffs
Versus
The HDFC Bank and Another …Defendants
INDEX
S. NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO.
1. Court Fee
2. Memo of Parties
3. Suit for Declaration and Mandatory and
Permanent Injunction on behalf of the
Plaintiffs alongwith affidavit.
4. Application under Order XXXIX Rule 1
and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908 along with
affidavit.
5. Address Form
6. List of Documents
7. Vakalatnama
`.
PLAINTIFFS
PLACE: NEW DELHI BALDEV KUMAR SINGH
DATED: ___.03.2024 Advocate for the Plaintiffs
463, Ward 7, Sector 29, Noida,
Uttar Pradesh – 201301
Enroll No. D/3537/2014
baldevnlu@gmail.com/9999793692
IN THE COURT OF LD. CIVIL JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA
COURT, EAST DISTRICT NEW DELHI.
CIVIL ORIGINAL SUIT No. ___ of 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. Kusum Bansal and Another …Plaintiffs
Versus
The HDFC Bank and Another …Defendants
MEMO OF PARTIES
1. Mrs. Kusum Bansal,
W/o Mr. Lakhi Chand Bansal
WZ-572E, Naraina Village,
New Delhi-110028 …Plaintiff
No.1
2. Mr. Lakhi Chand Bansal,
S/o
WZ-572E, Naraina Village,
New Delhi-110028 …Plaintiff
No. 2
Versus
1. The HDFC Bank,
Through its Branch Manager,
Branch- Naraina Vihar, New Delhi. …Defendant
No.1
2. Anamika Bansal,
D/o Balram Bhati,
Resident of H. No. 148-A,
Pocket VI, MIG Flats,
Mayur Vihar, Phase-III,
New Delhi-110096. …Defendant
No.2
Plaintiff No.1
Plaintiff No.2
Through
PLACE: NEW DELHI BALDEV KUMAR SINGH
DATED: ___.03.2024 Advocate for the Plaintiffs
463, Ward 7, Sector 29, Noida,
Uttar Pradesh – 201301
Enroll No. D/3537/2014
baldevnlu@gmail.com/9999793692
IN THE COURT OF LD. CIVIL JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA
COURT, EAST DISTRICT NEW DELHI.
CIVIL ORIGINAL SUIT No. ___ of 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. Kusum Bansal and Another …Plaintiffs
Versus
The HDFC Bank and Another …Defendants
SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
Most Respectfully Showeth:
1. That the Plaintiff No.1 is wife of the Plaintiff No.2 and was
mother-in-law of the Defendant No.2 and the Plaintiff No.2 was
the father-in-law of the Defendant No.2. It is submitted that the
Plaintiffs’ elder son namely Rahul Bansal, whose marriage was
solemnized with the Defendant No.2 on 24.04.2012 as per Hindu
Rites and Rituals.
2. That the Plaintiff is constrained to file the present suit against
the Defendants seeking declaration along with permanent and
mandatory injunction.
3. That the Defendant No. 1 is the bank of the Plaintiff, having its
registered office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg,
Lower Parel, Mumbai. However, all the transactions were carried
out by the Plaintiffs and Defendant No.2 from its branch office,
situated at Naraina, New Delhi-110028.
4. That immediately after marriage, the Son of the Plaintiffs and the
Defendant No.2 started residing at the matrimonial house
situated at WZ-572E, Naraina Village, New Delhi-110028 and on
02.09.2013, a daughter namely Haridaya alias Seerat was born
out of their wedlock. It is submitted that out of love and concern,
the Plaintiffs proposed the Defendant No.2 for opening of a joint
ownership locker with the Defendant No.1 at its branch for
keeping pieces of jewellery and valuable articles.
5. That at the mutual agreements and consent between the parties,
the Plaintiffs along with the Defendant No.2 requested Defendant
No.1 to open joint ownership locker facilities in the name of
Plaintiffs along with Defendant No.2 and the Defendant No.1
after complete satisfaction opened a joint locker No. 72 at its
branch with complete access right to each of the joint owners.
6. That due to some misunderstanding and matrimonial discord
between the Defendant No.2 and her husband (Plaintiffs’ Son),
the relationship of marriage between them came to an end and
after rounds of deliberation and conciliations, on
a mutual settlement agreement was executed between the
Defendant No.2 and her husband (Plaintiffs’ Son) for dissolution
of marriage.
7. That on the mutual settlement agreement
for dissolution of marriage was executed at Delhi Mediation
Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi and same was also been
brought on record in Case No. 18-V/14 (Anamika Bhati versus
Rahul Bansal and Others) and mediation case no. L-3622/15. It
is submitted that the Learned Karkardooma Court while passing
an order dated 10.12.2015 has discussed the terms and
conditions of the mutual settlement agreement wherein at
paragraph no.8, it has been recorded that the parties (Plaintiffs
and Defendant No.2) have agreed to close the joint locker no. 72
at HDFC Bank Naraina Vihar, District and also a joint account
in Canara Bank, Naraiya Vihar, Delhi and both the parties have
agreed to cooperate with each other in doing so.
8. That the mutual settlement agreement has also been brought on
record in a Criminal Misc. Case No. 4597 of 2016 (Rahul Bansal
and Others versus NCT of Delhi and Another) filed before the
Hon’ble High Court of Delhi and the Hon’ble High Court vide its
order 09.12.2016 after taking into consideration the mutual
agreement allowed the petition and quashed the criminal
proceedings pending against the Plaintiffs and his son (husband
of the Defendant No.2).
9. That 29.06.2019, the Plaintiff approached the Defendant No.1
for closure of the Locker No. 72 operation at its branch on the
ground of dissolution of marriage as well as relationship with the
Defendant No.2 and the Defendant No.2 has also given
undertaking that she herself wants to close that particular joint
locker no.72 at the Bank. It is submitted that the Plaintiffs have
also apprised the Defendant No.1 about the mutual settlement
agreement executed between the Defendant No.2 and her
husband as well as the order dated 09.12.2016 passed by the
Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Criminal Misc. Case No. 4597 of
2016 (Rahul Bansal and Others versus NCT of Delhi and
Another).
10. That on 03.07.2019, the Defendant No.1 rejected the Plaintiffs’
application dated 29.06.2019 for closure on the ground that all
the three joint owner of the joint locker no. 72 has to be
personally present for closure of the joint locker. And in
absence of any of the member of request for closure cannot be
entertained.
11. That the Plaintiff No.__ maintains a savings account bearing no.
20401930004796 at the Defendant No.1 branch and despite the
request for closure of the joint locker no. 72 in the light of the
mutual settlement agreement as well as order dated 09.12.2016
passed by the Delhi High Court, the Defendant No.1 is
continuously deducting charges against the maintenance of the
joint locker. It is submitted that since 29.09.2019, the
Defendant No.1 has deducted charges from the joint savings
account of the Plaintiffs on several dates and the details of the
deduction dates are being reproduced herein below for kind
perusal of this Learned Court:
12. That the Plaintiffs have also approached the Defendant No.2 for
honouring the terms of the mutual settlement dated ____ and to
make a statement before the Defendant No.1 as per deposition
made by her in paragraph no.8 of the order dated 10.12.2015
passed by the Learned Karkardooma Court in Mediation Case
No. L-3622/15 but all efforts of the Plaintiffs went in vain and
till today, Defendant No.2 has not approached neither the
Plaintiffs nor Defendant No.1 for closure of the joint locker
no.72.
13. That unwarranted act of the Defendant No.1 is causing
unnecessary mental, physical and monetary loss. It is
submitted that the act of the Defendant No.1 is in clear defiance
of the order dated 09.12.2016 passed by the Delhi High Court
and Defendant No.2 is also not cooperating with the Plaintiffs in
order to approach the Defendant No.1 for closure of the joint
locker no.72 operating at its Bank Branch.
14. In light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Plaintiffs
have been constrained to approach this Hon’ble Court by way of
the present application seeking a declaration that the Plaintiffs
may be declared as joint owner of locker no.72 maintained by
the Defendant No.1 in the light of the mutual settlement
agreement and through the present original suit, the Plaintiffs
are also praying for permanent and mandatory injunction
against the Defendant No.2 to honour the terms and conditions
of the mutual settlement agreement facilitating the Plaintiffs in
closure of the joint locker bearing no. 72 maintained by the
Defendant No.1.
15.It is further prayed that this Hon’ble Court may also pass
appropriate directions in the nature of permanent and
mandatory injunction against the Defendant No.1 to not to
deduct any further amount under the head of locker rental
amount for joint locker no.72 during the pendency of this
original suit before this Hon’ble Court and/ or pass any other
and further order(s) and direction(s) which this Hon’ble Court
may deem fit and proper.
16. The cause of action to file the present suit first arose _________
2015 when the Defendant No.2 consensually executed the mutual
settlement agreement and again cause of action arose on
29.06.2019 when Plaintiffs vide an application requested
Defendant No.1 for closure of joint locker no.72 and again the
cause of action arose on ___________________when the Defendant
No.2 refused to cooperate the Plaintiffs in the light of undertaking
deposed in a mutual settlement agreement executed in Medication
Case no. L3622/15 Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts,
Delhi and finally, the cause of action arose on _____________ when
the Defendant No.1 arbitrarily deducted maintenance charges from
the saving account of the Plaintiffs.
17. That the cause of action has arisen at __________, Naraina, Delhi
as the Joint Locker No. 72 is maintained by the Defendant No.1
Bank Branch at Naraina and all the transaction also happened
within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.
18. That present suit for the purpose of declaration and permanent
and mandatory injunction as is being prayed for herein, is being
valued at Rs. _______________/- on which court fees of Rs.
____________/- is being paid along with the plaint for the relief of
declaration and permanent and mandatory injunction. The
Plaintiffs undertakes to pay further court fees if the aforementioned
court fees is found to be deficient as and when this Hon’ble Court
directs.
19. That the present suit has been filed within the period of
limitation.
20. That the Plaintiffs have not filed any other suit nor any other
suit/proceedings pending on the same cause of action, in any
other court of law nor any other suit is pending before any other
court of law in India.
21. The Plaintiffs crave the leave of this Hon’ble Court to place on
record any further documents or to make any further
submissions relating to the present dispute.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, in the view of the facts and circumstances,
it is expedient in the interest of justice that this Hon’ble Court
may be pleased to:
(i) Issue an order(s) or directions (s) in the nature of the
decree for DECLARATION that Plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2 may
be declared as joint owners of locker no.72 maintained by
Defendant No.1 in the light of the mutual settlement
agreement
(ii) Issue an order(s) or directions (s) in the nature of decree
MANDATORY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION against
Defendant No.2 to honour the terms and conditions of the
mutual settlement agreement facilitating the Plaintiffs in
closure of the joint locker bearing no. 72 maintained by the
Defendant No.1.
Special Cost together with such any other relief which this
Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper be also awarded in favour
of the plaintiff and against the defendants, in the interest of
justice.
PLAINTIFF NO.1
PLAINTIFF NO.2
THROUGH
PLACE: NEW DELHI BALDEV KUMAR SINGH
DATED: ___.03.2024 Advocate for the Plaintiffs
463, Ward 7, Sector 29, Noida,
Uttar Pradesh – 201301
Enroll No. D/3537/2014
baldevnlu@gmail.com/9999793692
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi on ___ day of March, 2024, that the
contents of Paras 1 to ___ of the plaint are true and correct to my
knowledge while those of para __ to __ of the plaint are true upon
information received and believed to be true and correct. Last
para is the prayer clause before this Hon’ble Court.
PLAINTIFFS
IN THE COURT OF LD. CIVIL JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA
COURT, EAST DISTRICT NEW DELHI.
CIVIL ORIGINAL SUIT No. ___ of 2018
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. Kusum Bansal and Another …Plaintiffs
Versus
The HDFC Bank and Another …Defendants
AFFIDAVIT
I, Kusum Bansal W/o Lakhi Chand Bansal, aged about ______ years
old, R/o WZ-572E, Naraina Village, New Delhi-110028, do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1. That I am Plaintiff No.1 in the present Suit and I am well
conversant with the facts of the case.
2. That the accompanying Suit with the present affidavit has been
drafted by my counsel under my instructions and I affirm that the
reply of facts made therein are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge derived from the official records maintained by me in its
ordinary course of business.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
I, the Deponent hereinabove, do hereby verify and state that the
contents of the present Affidavit are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge. No part of it is false and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.
Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of March, 2024.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. CIVIL JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA
COURT, EAST DISTRICT NEW DELHI.
CIVIL ORIGINAL SUIT No. ___ of 20
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. Kusum Bansal and Another …Plaintiffs
Versus
The HDFC Bank and Another …Defendants
AFFIDAVIT
I, Lakhi Chand Bansal S/o , aged about
______ years old, R/o WZ-572E, Naraina Village, New Delhi-110028,
do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1. That I am Plaintiff No.2 in the present Suit and I am well
conversant with the facts of the case.
2. That the accompanying Suit with the present affidavit has been
drafted by my counsel under my instructions and I affirm that the
reply of facts made therein are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge derived from the official records maintained by me in its
ordinary course of business.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
I, the Deponent hereinabove, do hereby verify and state that the
contents of the present Affidavit are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge. No part of it is false and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.
Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of March, 2024.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. CIVIL JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA
COURT, EAST DISTRICT NEW DELHI.
CIVIL ORIGINAL SUIT No. ___ of 2018
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. Kusum Bansal and Another …Plaintiffs
Versus
The HDFC Bank and Another …Defendants
APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF UNDER ORDER
XXXIX RULE 1 AND 2 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 FOR THE GRANT OF AN
EX-PARTE AD INTERIM INJUNCTION AGAINST DEFENDANT
NO.1.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the Plaintiffs/Applicants have filed the above-mentioned
suit before this Hon’ble court for Declaration and Permanent and
Mandatory Injunction against the Defendant and same is
pending before this Hon’ble Court for adjudication.
2. That the contents of the said suit kindly be read as part of the
present application as well, as the contents of the same have not
reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
3. That the Defendant No.1 is in clear disobedience of the order
dated 09.12.2016 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in
Criminal Misc. Case No. 4597 of 2016 (Rahul Bansal and Others
versus NCT of Delhi and Another) and the Plaintiffs vide an
application dated 29.06.2019 also informed the Defendant No.1
to not to deduct any amount from the saving account number
20401930004796 of the Plaintiff No.___ against the maintenance
charges of Joint Locker No.72. Thus, the continuous deduction
made by the Defendant No. 1 from the saving account no.
20401930004796 of the Plaintiff No.___ is wholly illegal and the
same is bad in the eyes of law in the view of the facts and
circumstances mentioned in the plaint. The plaintiffs are old
aged ailing citizen of the country.
4. That in case an ex-parte ad interim injunction as prayed for is
not granted in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendant
No.1, the Plaintiffs would suffer irreparable loss and injury
which cannot be compensated in terms of money and the very
purpose of filing the present suit would be defeated.
5. That the Plaintiffs/Applicants have prima-facie case in his favour
and balance of convenience is also in favour of the
plaintiffs/applicants.
PRAYER
In view of the above facts and circumstance, it is, therefore,
most prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass an
ex-parte ad interim permanent and mandatory injunction in
favour of the Plaintiffs/ Applicants and against the Defendant
No.1, restraining the Defendant No.1 to make any deduction
from the saving account number 20401930004796 under the
head of maintenance charges of joint locker no.72, till the final
disposal of the accompanying suit property by the Hon’ble Court,
in the interest of justice.
Such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case
be also passed in the favour of the Plaintiff and against the
Defendant to meet the interest of justice.
PLAINTIFF NO.1
PLAINTIFF NO.2
THROUGH
PLACE: NEW DELHI BALDEV KUMAR SINGH
DATED: ___.03.2024 Advocate for the Plaintiffs
463, Ward 7, Sector 29, Noida,
Uttar Pradesh – 201301
Enroll No. D/3537/2014
baldevnlu@gmail.com/9999793692
IN THE COURT OF LD. CIVIL JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA
COURT, EAST DISTRICT NEW DELHI.
CIVIL ORIGINAL SUIT No. ___ of 2018
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. Kusum Bansal and Another …Plaintiffs
Versus
The HDFC Bank and Another …Defendants
AFFIDAVIT
I, Kusum Bansal W/o Lakhi Chand Bansal, aged about ______ years
old, R/o WZ-572E, Naraina Village, New Delhi-110028, do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1. That I am Plaintiff No.1 in the present Application and I am well
conversant with the facts of the case.
2. That the accompanying Application with the present affidavit has
been drafted by my counsel under my instructions and I affirm that
the reply of facts made therein are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge derived from the official records maintained by me in its
ordinary course of business.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
I, the Deponent hereinabove, do hereby verify and state that the
contents of the present Affidavit are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge. No part of it is false and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.
Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of March, 2024.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. CIVIL JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA
COURT, EAST DISTRICT NEW DELHI.
CIVIL ORIGINAL SUIT No. ___ of 2018
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. Kusum Bansal and Another …Plaintiffs
Versus
The HDFC Bank and Another …Defendants
AFFIDAVIT
I, Lakhi Chand Bansal S/o , aged about
______ years old, R/o WZ-572E, Naraina Village, New Delhi-110028,
do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1. That I am Plaintiff No.2 in the present Suit and I am well
conversant with the facts of the case.
2. That the accompanying Suit with the present affidavit has been
drafted by my counsel under my instructions and I affirm that the
reply of facts made therein are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge derived from the official records maintained by me in its
ordinary course of business.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
I, the Deponent hereinabove, do hereby verify and state that the
contents of the present Affidavit are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge. No part of it is false and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.
Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of March, 2024.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. CIVIL JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA
COURT, EAST DISTRICT NEW DELHI.
CIVIL ORIGINAL SUIT No. ___ of 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. Kusum Bansal and Another …Plaintiffs
Versus
The HDFC Bank and Another …Defendants
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
S. NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
PLACE: NEW DELHI BALDEV KUMAR SINGH
DATED: ___.03.2024 Advocate for the Plaintiffs
463, Ward 7, Sector 29, Noida,
Uttar Pradesh – 201301
Enroll No. D/3537/2014
baldevnlu@gmail.com/9999793692
