Make your own free website on Tripod.com

Babus' whole hearted acceptance of 
outdated regulations.


Last updated - Tuesday, 08-Feb-2005 11:17:56 EST
    BEFORE THE COURT OF ESTATE OFFICER, 29-THE MALL , MEERUT CANTT.
    ( This office is called a court - wherein there are only 2 parties
     involved . The Officer becomes the self appointed judge , and one of
    the plaintiffs . The judge can reject any points not conducive to his
     own point of view.)
    No.ESTATE/DEMOLITION/344/2000
    COUNTER AFFIDAVIT TO THE AFFIDAVIT DT. 20.4.2001 of O.P.
    2. That the contents of para 1 of the affidavit dt. 20.4.2001
    of O.P. need no comments ( great to be the judge AND one of the
    plaintiffs )
    3. That the contents of para 2 of the affidavit are misconceived and
    totally  vague . That the premises in question are held on old
    grant terms contained in GGO - 179 dt . 12.9.1836. ( this is a
    government whose just powers are derived by the dictates of long
    dead people whose mantle was thrown of with great sacrifice
    and loss of life and property )
    8. That contents of para 8 of the affidavit as stated are not admitted
    . That GGO 179 dt 12.9.1836 was never repealed ( and of course India
    never became independent ) and the said GGO is still existing law.(???)
    10. That contents of para 9 of the affidavit as stated are not admitted.
    That GGO- 179 dt. 12.9.1836 is still an existing law and it is not
    discriminatory in any manner ( because we say so ).
    39. That contents of para 38 of the affidavit are specifically denied.
    That GGO-179 dt. 12.9.1836 is an existing law as held by
    different High courts and even by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
    of India in several rulings. (  God bless our country , what happened
    to independence ? what about 1857 ? )
    ( The document this refers to is of no consequence
    the main point is that this admits to GGO 179 being currently
    effective )
    Back