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.)
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
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 CGO - 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 That CGO 179 dt 12.9.1836 was never repealed ( and of course India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 CGO- 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