Bhimsen Jain Suit For Mandatory Injunction

In the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rohtak
B.S Jain, XEN (Retd.), R/o H.No. 130, Mansarover

Colony, Rohtak
…..Plaintiff/Petitioner
Versus
1. XEN,
Yamuna Water Services Division,
Sampla,
Rohtak.
2. Account Officer,
Irrigation and Water Resource Department,
Canal Colony
Hisar.
3. To Engineer in Chief,
P.W Irrigation and W.R Department,
Panchkula,
Haryana
….Defendants
Suit for Mandatory Injuction
Sir,
The Plaintiff/petitioner most respectfully
submits as under:-
1. That the plaintiff is law abiding and peace loving

citizens and are having full faith in the law of
land.
2. That plaintiff was retired from the post of Executive

Engineer from P.W Irrigation and W.R Department,
Haryana on 31/1/2001.After that plaintiff was
attached to the office of defendant No. 1 vide letter
number 844/2EE-1/584/2012(Vol III) dated 9/2/2018.The
copy of same is attached herewith as Annexure A-1.
3. That wife of plaintiff namely Smt. Saroj Jain was

suffering from heart pain on 13/1/2018 and therefore
she was got admitted and urgently operated in Nobel
Heart, Hospital, Rohtak on same day. That an amount
of Rs 1,65,452/-(One Lakh Sixty Five Thousand Four
Hundred and Fifty Two) had been spent on her
treatment by the plaintiff.
4. That plaintiff has fulfilled claim form and completed
all formalities regarding the claim and submitted all
bills regarding claim in February 2018 in the office
of S.C, Y.W.S Circle, Rohtak i.e defendant no. 1
5. That defendant no. 2 has returned medical

reimbursement bill of plaintiff vide letter dated
985/A)/IB/HSR dated 05/06/2018.The copy of same is
attached herewith as Annexure A-2 That plaintiff has
incurred total expenses of Rs 1,65,452/- and raised
demand of Rs 165452 from the office of defendant no.
2 but defendant No. 2 has reduced plaintiff claim
from 165452/- to Rs 89750/-The copy of same is
attached herewith as Annexure A-3.
6. That as per F.D Hr. Department U.O No.5/7/2005

Haryana Department-IB$C dated 20/12/2012 and U.O No.
5/7/2005-UB$C dated 3/5/2006, the medical
reimbursement claims in which treatment is taken away
from any repudiated/specialized hospital outside the
approved list of hospitals are disposed of at the
Administrative Department without referring subject
to the condition that is the recommendation of Health
Department would imply only the grant of emergency
certificate by the civil surgeon/chief medical
officer. It is further mentioned that there would be
no requirement for further clarification approval
from the health department.
a) Regarding the fixing of package and implants

rates applicable on the state empanelled
private hospitals
b) Regarding the fixing of ICU and ICU+

ventilators charges for non-package
procedures.
That the copy of H.D HR. No. 2/56/2014-1HB-3 dated

21/5/2015 is attached herewith as Annexure A-4.
7. That as per the concurrence of the Finance

Department, Haryana vide their U.O Principal
Secretary/FCF/2012/NIL dated 4/12/2012, my client
claim came to Rs. 145452/-. That the copy of U.O
Principal Secretary/FCF/2012/NIL dated 4/12/2012
and new calculation sheet of my client is attached
herewith as Annexure A-5.
8. That defendant has wrote letter dated 18/6/2018 to

defendant no. 2 and submitted all bills with copy
of U.O Principal Secretary/FCF/2012/NIL dated
4/12/2012 and new calculation sheet. The copy of
new calculation sheet as per U.O Principal
Secretary/FCF/2012/NIL dated 4/12/2012 is attached
herewith as Annexure A-6. But defendant No. 2 did
not take any action on genuine request of plaintiff
as per law.
9. That plaintiff has also wrote letter dated

27/6/2018 to defendant no. 3 and submitted all
bills with copy of U.O Principal
Secretary/FCF/2012/NIL dated 4/12/2012 and new
calculation sheet. The copy of same is attached
herewith as Annexure A-7. But defendant No. 3 did
not take any action on genuine request of plaintiff
as per law.
10. That above mentioned acts and conducts of you

defendants is illegal and against the well settled
law and principles of natural justice.
11. That plaintiff is senior citizen and has been

harassed by all the defendants by not processing
his genuine claim of Rs 1,45,452/-in spite of
submitting all documents and completing all
formalities which is against the provisions of law
and natural justice. That by above mentioned acts
and conducts of defendants, plaintiff has suffered
mental agony, harassment and insult for which
defendants are totally liable.
12. That in spite of repeated requests and demands,

defendants do not agree to process the genuine
claim of the plaintiff of Rs 1,45,452/- and the
defendants is denying the genuine claim of the
plaintiff as per law, hence this suit.
13. That the present controversy between the parties

to the suit is not pending in any court of law and
competent jurisdiction.
14. That the cause of action for the present suit

arises day to day within the jurisdiction of this
learned court and this learned court has got
jurisdiction to entertain and try this suit.
15. That the value of the suit for the purpose of

court fee is in determinable, while the value for the
purpose of jurisdiction is assessed at Rs.3,00000/-
A court fee stamp of Rs.25/- is being affixed
on the plaint.
16. That the plaintiff has also sent legal notice to

defendants through his counsel on 21/8/2018 and
requested them to process their genuine claim. The
copy of legal notice along with postal receipts is
attached herewith as Annexure 8 and Annexure A-9.That
defendants even did not bother to reply on the legal
notice sent by the plaintiff.
17. That the plaintiffs pray that a decree for
(a) mandatory injunction directing the defendants to

pay full claim amount of Rs 1,45,452/-( One Lakh
Fourty Five Thousand Four Hundred and Fifty Two)
along with interest @ 18% per annum) to the
plaintiff from the date of filing present suit till
actual realization and Rs. 1,00000/- as
compensation for causing the mental agony, tension
and harassment to plaintiff in the interest of
justice.
(b) to grant costs
(c) such other and further reliefs that this Hon’ble

court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of
the suit.
Place: Rohtak
Date:
Plaintiff
B.S Jain, XEN (Retd.), R/o

H.No. 130, Mansarover
Colony, Rohtak
Verified that the contents mentioned above are true &

correct to my knowledge and belief.
Plaintiff
B.S Jain, XEN (Retd.), R/o

H.No. 130, Mansarover
Colony, Rohtak
Through:-
Bharat Jain Advocate

In the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rohtak
B.S Jain Versus XEN, Yamuna Water

Services Division, Sampla, Rohtak etc..
Affidavit of B.S Jain, XEN (Retd.), R/o H.No. 130,

Mansarover Colony, Rohtak
I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm

and declare as under:-
1. That I am plaintiff in the present case and

conversant with the facts of present case and
thus competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That the plaintiff/deponent has filed the above

noted suit for mandatory injunction
3. That the contents of the above mentioned plaint

are true and correct and may be read as part and
parcel of this affidavit and same is not
repeated here for the sake of brevity.
Deponent
Verification:-
Verified that the contents of affidavit are true and

correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, no part
of it is false and nothing is concealed therein.
Rohtak
Dated:
Deponent

Bhimsen Jain Suit For Mandatory Injunction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bhimsen Jain Suit For Mandatory Injunction

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bhimsen Jain Suit For Mandatory Injunction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rohtak

B.S Jain, XEN (Retd.), R/o H.No. 130, Mansarover

Suit for Mandatory Injuction

1. That the plaintiff is law abiding and peace loving

2. That plaintiff was retired from the post of Executive

3. That wife of plaintiff namely Smt. Saroj Jain was

5. That defendant no. 2 has returned medical

6. That as per F.D Hr. Department U.O No.5/7/2005

a) Regarding the fixing of package and implants

b) Regarding the fixing of ICU and ICU+

That the copy of H.D HR. No. 2/56/2014-1HB-3 dated

7. That as per the concurrence of the Finance

8. That defendant has wrote letter dated 18/6/2018 to

9. That plaintiff has also wrote letter dated

10. That above mentioned acts and conducts of you

11. That plaintiff is senior citizen and has been

12. That in spite of repeated requests and demands,

13. That the present controversy between the parties

14. That the cause of action for the present suit

15. That the value of the suit for the purpose of

16. That the plaintiff has also sent legal notice to

17. That the plaintiffs pray that a decree for

(a) mandatory injunction directing the defendants to

(b) to grant costs

(c) such other and further reliefs that this Hon’ble

B.S Jain, XEN (Retd.), R/o

Verified that the contents mentioned above are true &

B.S Jain, XEN (Retd.), R/o

Bharat Jain Advocate

B.S Jain Versus XEN, Yamuna Water

Affidavit of B.S Jain, XEN (Retd.), R/o H.No. 130,

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm

1. That I am plaintiff in the present case and

2. That the plaintiff/deponent has filed the above

3. That the contents of the above mentioned plaint

Verified that the contents of affidavit are true and

You might also like