[ STUDENTS' INTERNSHIP REPORT & COURT DIARY]

BBA - LLB, BA - LLB

(Five Years Integrated Course)

LLB
(Three Years Course)

MERI
COLLEGE
MERI PROFESSIONAL AND LAW INSTITUTE
APPROVED BY BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & AFFILIATED TO M.D. UNIVERSITY, ROHTAK
Run By Academic Council consisting of Eminent Lawyers, Jurists & Retired Judges of High Court & Academicians

46th Milestone, Asanda, Rohtak Road, Sampla (Delhi NCR) - 124501

Mob: 9555369369 • E-mail: meripli@meri.edu.in • Web: https://meri.edu.in/lawcollege/

VISIT TO COURTS AND CHAMBERS

Session: __2022-2024____

Mukesh Shah

6th
Vipin Grarden Gali no 9 plot 47 48

9013236341

Mr Upender
Mukesh Shah LLB 6th Sem

Four
Mr Upender
 Part A: Internship Certificate

Upender
INTERNSHIP CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Mr. Mukesh Shah S/o Sh. Bharat Shah purscuing
in 6th semester 3rd year, MERI College has worked as in intern with
me from 20th March 2024 to 20th April 2024 in Delhi High Court and
Supreme Court of India.

His Major work includes research on case laws, attending the court
proceedings, Drafting of legal documents, drafting replies and other
miscellaneous applications related to law.

Mukesh shah bears a good moral character, and disciplined work ethics.
He shall prove to be an asset to an organization

April 2024
New Delhi

upender
Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India.

A-19 LGF, Pamposh Enclave, Greter Kailash - 1, New Delhi - 110048

M: +91-9015583573, E-mail: upender1@codesiox.com
 Table of Content

S.NO. PARTICULARS PAGE

1. OVERVIEW OF THE INTERNSHIP WORK

2. Internship Duties

3.
PART B - Facts and Analysis of the Internship

4.
PART C - Legal Documents drafted during
internship

5.
Conclusion

1
 AN OVERVIEW OF THE INTERNSHIP WORK

Name of the Lawyer – Upender, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India Areas of Practice – Civil and
criminal litigation (before Courts and Tribunals in Delhi), legal advisory, drafting Commercial Agreements,
Advising on Corporate Transactions, Securities law.

Empanelled with: Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., EPF Organization
Courts of Practice – The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, the National
Company Law Tribunal, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Office – A19, Pamposh Enclave, Greater
Kailash, New Delhi, Delhi 110048 Duration of Internship – 20th March, 2024 till 20th April, 2024
Duration specified in Diary – 20th March, 2024 till 15th April, 2024

I, Mukesh Shah, a 6th Sem student at Meri Collage, Maharshi Dayanad University, interned under Mr.
Upender, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India, for a period of 4 weeks in March and April, 2024.
I interned after the summer break and thus got ample opportunity to observe the court proceedings and to
learn the intricacies involved therein. The office staff consisted of Mr. Upender, along with two other
associates, own file clerks, and an office boy.

Mr. Upender is an Advocate on Record, Supreme Court and has been practicing in the Supreme Court and
Delhi High Court for more than 15 years.

The work allotted to me included research work on case laws, reading case files, assisting associates in
drafting.

This diary is divided into two parts, wherein part 1 is the day-wise summary of the internship and my
experience and observations therein and part 2 consists of documents which I assisted in drafting during the
internship period.

I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to Advocate Mr. Upender under whose aegis and guidance, I
was able to gain a very enriching internship experience. His constant help and encouragement helped me
gain great insights into the practical workings of the field and further understand and improve upon the art
of legal drafting and research. His guidance made this a great learning and important experience for future
professional development.

I would also like to thank Advocate Mr. Ankush Bhardwaj who works in the capacity of an associate with Mr.
Upender and also happen to be my college senior his guidance as mentor and friend have always helped me
learn not only law but how to calmly deal with a stressful station that you face while working as an advocate.
It was a delight to see his journey from the Moot court hall to the Hon’ble High Court.

3
 INTERNSHIP DUTIES:
RESEARCH: Research constitutes an important aspect of any internship whether it is a law firm or a
court internship. Hence one needs to be well acquainted with various legal research tools, the
prominent being Manupatra, Lexis Nexis, Westlaw etc.

DRAFTING: Drafting skills require lots of hard work and patience. One needs to be well versed with
the various drafting specimens and formatting skills in order to undertake and complete such
assignments properly. Apart from these, assignments may include proof reading of various legal
documents, observance of court proceedings, making notes on various legal issues etc. and other
task depending on the nature of the internship.

DAILY INTERNSHIP DUTIES:

1. Supporting the lawyers that come into the office and program. Sitting in on meetings,
briefings and appointments and offering required assistance.

2. Organizing list of dates, chronology and case synopsis.

3. Reading any suggested law related materials for my own benefit.

4. Interacting to various lawyers in our office.

5. Research on judgments that are related to facts of cases.

5
1. FILING OF A VAKALATNAMA

Vakalatnama, also called Vakilpatra (VP), is a document, by which, the party filing the case
authorizes the Advocate to represent on their behalf. A vakalatnama gives a lot of authority
to the pleader. It should be executed by the client with great care and scrutiny. Order III of
the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 provides under rule 4(1) that “No pleader Shall act for any
person in any Court unless he has been appointed for the purpose by such person by a
document in writing signed by such person or by his recognized agent or by some other
person duly authorized by or under a power-of-attorney to make such appointment”. On
the general terms, a Vakalatnama contains:

● The date on which it is executed.

● The name of case/cases for which the pleader(s) has been appointed

● The name of the court / courts for which the pleader has been appointed

● The name of the party appointing the Advocate and the parties authority to
appoint (Eg: Power of Attorney Holder or Recognized Agent)
● If not executed by the party in person, then the document supporting the
appointment
● The name of the lawyer / pleader / advocate(s) so appointed
● The address of the pleader, for service of documents
● The case title / number to identify the case for which the appointment has been
made

● The powers / decision making authority given to the advocate. This may limit the
advocate only to obtain certified copies, or
● Signature of the party or parties (with the name of the party or parties next to
it)
● Signature of the pleader(s) or lawyer(s) accepting the vakalatnama

6
PART C - LEGAL DOCUMENTS DRAFTED DURING THE INTERNSHIP
[Draft of the Letter written to the District Collector Hindon River Mills Case]

To:

Subject: Illegal and arbitrary demand raised by U.P. Power Crop. Ltd

Dear Sir/Ma’am-

1. We write this letter after being a victim of the arbitrary nature of the UP Power Crop.
hereinafter and after referred as U.P.P.C. Their arbitrary nature is making it very difficult for
us to repay the amount due as per the directions given by the Hon’ble BIFR in the order
dated 08.08.2015 (Case No. 251/02 and 351/03). In the order dated 8.8.2005 the Hon’ble
BIFR declared the Company Hindon River Mills Ltd as a sick company under section 3 (1) (o)
of the act and thus as per the provisions of SICA section, 22 recoveries from a sick unit is
prohibited. Thus a solution to the problem of recovery was proposed by the Hon’ble BIFR in
the order 08.08.2015 (Case No. 251/02 and 351/03) Para 7.2 point (ii) the Hon’ble BIFR said:-

“Para 7.2 point No (ii) – The Company shall reconcile its dews with U.P. Power Corp. And U.P. Power
Corp. shall cooperate with the company to crystallise the outstanding dews within one month.”

2. To abide by the order passed by the Hon’ble BIFR dated 08.08.2015 (Case No. 251/02 and
351/03) in order to pay the dews a ‘one time statement scheme’ was introduced by the
company and the “one time settlement of electricity dews” was also communicated to the
U.P. Power Crop. Ltd. by means of letters.
3. M/s Hindon River Mills has never , Upon being notified by the U.P.P.C regarding the
outstanding amount, has always acted in good faith by taking the following steps:-

a) By paying the outstanding amount of Rs 24,90,240 towards the total

outstanding amount. The same has also been conveyed to them via letter
dated 12.12.2013
b) We made good faith “One Time Settlement” OTS to abide To abide
by the order passed by the Hon’ble BIFR dated 08.08.2015 (Case No. 251/02
and 351/03)
4. The OTS offer submitted to U.P.P.C by letter dated April 30, 2010 consisted of the following
elements:-
a) In monthly instalments beginning from January 1, 2011 i.e.
Moratorium of 8 months if proposal is approved in May 2010
b) Each monthly installment will be of Rs. 23.90 Lacs to be paid in the
month starting from Jan. 2011 to June 2011 equally in six months period
c) UPPCL will tackle the issue of 10% recovery charge with District
Officials, if this issue arises in future. Company will not be responsible for
10% recovery charges of OTS amount and UPPCI will recall the recovery
proceedings.
d) To provide New Electricity connection in present premises after the

7
 payment of 1 installment.

5. In an unfortunate turn of events, The Hindon River Mills received a notice dated 29.06.2013
demanding of the dew amount of Rs. 11702396/- the amount so requested is not only in
violation of section 22 of SICA but also in violation of the order of Hon’ble BIFR. Also in the
amount so requested has not been calculated after taking into consideration the payment
previously made.
6. The assets of the company are in symbolic possession of Kotek Mahindra as per by the
provision of SARFASI Act. as the same has been mortgaged to avail loan service from the
bank hence payment via seal of assets is out of the question.
7. It must be also be noted that in the notice sent by the U.P.P.C dated 29.06.2013 the two
units of Hindon River Mills are being treated as separate entity which is a wrong
interpretation as both being the part of the same company.
8. Our Humble prayer to the honourable district collector is that. U.P.P.C should first crystalize
the amount dew.

9. This notice is without prejudice to any right and remedies that we have against you. We
reserve our right to initiate any appropriate action against you, including but not limited to
initiating civil and criminal legal proceeding.
10.This notice is being issued without prejudice to my clients rights and contention. A copy of
this notice is being retained in my office for record and ready reference.

Your sincerely,

Upender

8
 IN THE COURT OF SHRI MOHINDER VIRAT DISTRICT JUDGE-SOUTH-EAST, SAKET,
NEW DELHI

EXECTION PETITTION No. 166 0F 2019 IN

CIVIL SUIT No. 166 OF 2019 IN THE MATTER
OF :-
Smt. Sangita Sen …DECREE HOLDER VERSUS

Smt. Kajal Kumari …JUDGMENT DEBTOR

APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 12 RULE 6 OF THE CPC FOR JUDGMENT ON

ADMISSION OF FACTS BY THE DEFENDANT.

1. The accompanying suit is filed by the Plaintiffs for arrears of rent in property bearing No. D-
16, Upper Ground Floor (front), Grater Kailash Enclave-I, New Delhi-110048 the rent of the
said property is in arrears since the month of January of the year 2018.

2. A detailed iteration of the facts of the present case is present in the Plaint and the same are
not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity. The same shall be read in consonance with
the present application. The instant application is being moved by the Plaintiffs on the
ground that the Defendant have specifically admitted to the facts that the defendant has not
paid any rent since the month of January of the year 2018. The defendant admitted the dew
rent being 13,000/ per month in a statement given on oath before the Hon’ble Court on
18.08.2018

3. It is well settled that a preliminary decree can be passed by the Court based on the

admissions made by a party to the suit. It has been held as follows:

Raveesh Chand Jain vs. Raj Rani Jain, 2015 (2) SCALE
302:
15. As discussed hereinabove, there is no dispute with regard to the law settled by this Court
that Order XII Rule 6 confers wide discretion on the Court to pass judgment either at the stage
of the suit on the basis of admission of the facts made in the pleadings or otherwise, but the
Court shall later on decide the other questions which arise for consideration in the Suit.

Rameshwar Prasad Gupta vs. Rajinder Kumar Gupta and Ors., decided on 18.07.2011
in CS(OS) No.
2362/2008:
39. For the aforesaid reasons and admission made by the Defendant No. 1, I am of the
considered view that the trial in the present case is not necessary as the parties are not at

9
 issue on any question of law and fact. Thus, the application filed by the Plaintiff under Order
XII Rule 6 Code of Civil Procedure is liable to be allowed. The Court is otherwise empowered to
pronounce the judgment under the provision of Order XV of the CPC.
40. I accordingly pass a preliminary decree for partition declaring that the Plaintiff and
Defendants 1 and 2 have equal 1/3rd share in the suit property, being built up property No.
92, BanarsiDass Estate, Timarpur, Delhi - 110 054.

4. That the balance of convenience lies in the favour of the Plaintiffs for passing a preliminary

decree of partition with respect to the suit property. As such, this is a fit case for

preliminary decree being passed on the basis of admission by the Defendants.

5. The Plaintiffs submit that they would suffer grave prejudice and irreparable loss if such order

as prayed for is not granted. The Plaintiffs have a very strong prima facie case and there is

every likelihood to succeed before this Hon’ble Court.

6. The present application is bona fide and is being filed in the interests of justice, equity and
good conscience.

7. PRAYER

In view of the aforesaid, it is, therefore, the most respectfully prayed this Hon’ble Court may
graciously be pleased to:

(i) Pass a preliminary decree directing the defendant to pay the rent as per there
admissions given before the Hon’ble Court on 18.08.2018.

PLAINTIFFS

Through

Advocate for the Plaintiffs

Place
Date:

10
 LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT

I Pratibha Malhotra W/o Late Dr. G.P. Malhotra resident of H.No 1105, Sector-15, Faridabad Aged 89
years being in sound and disposing state of mind and physical health, hereby revoke all former Wills,
Codicils and other Testamentary dispositions heretofore made by me and declare this to be my last
Will and testament :-

This Will is made by me without any persuasion or coercion and out of my own independent decision
only. I hereby revoke all testamentary depositions made or executed herein before and I declare this
to be my last Will.

That I being the absolute owner of the assets which are detailed hereinafter:-

(a) GF-1-W-122, Grater Kailash – II, New Delhi, 110040

(b) 203 (Second Floor) 59, Shakemtala Apartments, New Delhi 110019
(c) Money in Bank account of Punjab National Bank, Janpath, New Delhi,
Saveing Bank Acount number : 0131000100151940
(d) Money in Bank account of State Bank of India, Neelam Chowk,
Faridabad 121001, Saveing Bank Acount number : 11081550833
(e) Money in Bank account of Standard Chartered Bank, New Friends Colony, New Delhi 110025,
Saving Bank Account number : 54410362053
(f) Money in Bank account of XXXXXXXXXXX, Saving Bank Account number: 52610109010.

Whereas my late husband Dr G.P. Malhotra owned a housing property situated at 1105, Sector-15,

Faridabad, measuring 1126 Sq. Yds whereas, my husband Dr G.P. Malhotra expired on 1 st February

2017 and whereas in his life time, before his death, He executed a Will dated 23rd July 2016
bequeathing all his right in the said housing property in my favour.

Whereas, I have two married daughters namely Suniti Uppal wife of Sh. Jai Uppal resident of B-10,
NDSE, New Delhi and Ritu Uppal wife of Sh. Pankaj Uppal resident of H.No 1015, Sector-4, Gurgaon.

1. I appoint Mr. to be the executor of my Will.

2. I being the absolute owner of the housing property situated at 1105, Sector-15, Faridabad,
measuring 1126 Sq. Yds would now like my two daughters namely Suniti Uppal wife of Sh. Jai
Uppal and Ritu Uppal wife of Sh. Pankaj Uppal resident each to take 50-50% of the said
property.
3. I bequeath my entire right, title and interest in GF-1-W-122, Grater Kailash – II, New Delhi,
110040 to my daughter Ritu Uppal wife of Sh. Pankaj Uppal for her to enjoy, hold, use and/or
dispose of as per his wishes.
4. I bequeath my entire right, title and interest in 203 (Second Floor) 59, Shakemtala
11
 Apartments, New Delhi 110019 to my daughter Suniti Uppal wife of Sh. Jai Uppal for her to
enjoy, hold, use and/or dispose of as per his wishes.
5. I bequeath my entire right, title and interest in the cash lying in my saving Account at Punjab
National Bank, Janpath, New Delhi, Saveing Bank Account number: 0131000100151940
unconditionally to my daughter, Ritu Uppal, for her to enjoy, hold, use and/or dispose of as
per his wishes.
6. I bequeath my entire right, title and interest in the cash lying in my saving Account at Punjab
National Bank, Janpath, New Delhi, Saveing Bank Account number: 0131000100151940
unconditionally to my daughter, Ritu Uppal, for her to enjoy, hold, use and/or dispose of as
per his wishes.
7. I bequeath my entire right, title and interest in the cash lying in my saving Account at State
Bank of India, Neelam Chowk, Faridabad 121001, Saveing Bank Acount number:
11081550833 unconditionally to my daughter, Ritu Uppal, for her to enjoy, hold, use and/or
dispose of as per her wishes.
8. The cash lying in bank account of Standard Chartered Bank, New Friends Colony, New Delhi
110025, Saving Bank Account number : 54410362053 to be divided in the proportion of 50:50
among my daughters Ritu Uppal and Suniti Uppal to enjoy, hold, use and/or dispose of as per
their wishes.
9. The cash lying in bank account of XXXXXXXXXXX, Saving Bank Account number :
52610109010 to be divided in the proportion of

50:50 among my daughters Ritu Uppal and Suniti Uppal to enjoy, hold, use and/or
dispose of as per their wishes.
10. And other minor assets such as car and all to be divided in 50-50

Dated this day of , 2018.

Executed by:

PRATIBHA MALHOTRA
TESTATOR
Aadhar No. XXXXXXXXX PAN—
XXXXXXXXXX
Mob. XXxXXXXXxxXX

This Will has been executed by the Testator in the presence of witnesses whose signatures and
particulars are provided below:

12
Sign: Sign:
Name: Name:
Occupation: Occupation:
Address: Address:

Age: Age:
Date: Date:

13
 IN THE COURT OF AT NEW DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF

LT. COL. PRABHJOT SINGH ................................................... PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

SHILPA RAY & ANR ..................................................................... DEFENDANTS

SUIT FOR DEFAMATION UNDER SECTION 500, INDIAN PENAL CODE

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Plaintiff is serving in the Corps of Electronics & Mechanical Engineers of the

Indian Army as an Lieutenant Colonel in his present posting. He enjoys a reputation of

unblemished integrity and honest throughout his professional career till date. In

recognition of his services to the Country the Plaintiff was awarded a special

commendation from the Chief of Army Staff in the year 2014. It will not be out of place

to mention here that considering ability and integrity, the Plaintiff is due to appear for

the promotion board shortly.

2. That the Defendant No. 1 is well acquainted with the Petitioner through common friends

since 2003 as the wife of Defendant No. 2 who was also enrolled with the Petitioner

during Degree Engineering Course. It is a matter of fact that since the inception of

marriage between Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 2 there were frequent fights

which often lead to physical abuse as well. It was during this difficult period in the life of

14
 Defendant No. 1 that the Petitioner along with his wife sympathised with Defendant No.

1’s difficulty. However, the frequent fights led to divorce between the two Defendants.

It was during this time that the Petitioner under the instruction and company of his wife

decided to provide mental and moral support to Defendant No. 1.

3. That during this period the Defendant No. 1 had approached the Petitioner and his wife

to help the Defendant No. 1 financially. In view of the fact that the Defendant No. 1

being a single mother with a young child, the Petitioner’s wife never shirked from her

duty as a friend and provided her immense emotional and moral strength after the said

divorce. During this period, the Defendant No. 1 had urged Petitioner’s wife to

accompany her to several places under various personal grounds but due to prior

commitments had requested her husband i.e. the Petitioner to accompany the

Defendant No. 1, who in good faith and as a sincere sympathiser agreed to accompany

the said Defendant only pursuant to his wife’s instruction. It is without saying during all

this while, the Petitioner was absolutely unaware of the Defendants sinister plans to

defame and malign the reputation of the Petitioner.

4. That the Defendant No. 1 under a figment of her imagination took up a fancy for the

Petitioner and made it known to the Petitioner that she wanted to marry him which

could be accomplished only if the Petitioner divorced his legally wedded wife.

5. That the Petitioner was shocked at such treaties and unacceptable exhortations by

Defendant No. 1, to which the Petitioner raised serious objection and refused to any of

the frivolous demands made by the Defendants. On such refusal and objection, the

Defendants threatened the Petitioner with dire consequence and threatened to ruin and

damage his reputation by implicating his name in sexual harassment case. The

15
 Defendant No. 1 also made an illegal demand of Rs. 20, 00, 000/-(Rupees Twenty Lakhs)

from the Plaintiff.

6. That under these circumstances, the Petitioner and his wife discontinued any social

contact or interactions to protect their family and their marriage. It is apparent that the

Defendant No. 1 post this incident was determined to hurt, and harm the public image

and reputation of the Petitioner as well as his professional career.

7. That sometime in the first week of February, 2016 the Defendant No. 1 along with her

Husband i.e. Defendant No. 2, circulated an audio recording on social media and

Whatsapp to the Petitioner’s colleague and common friends containing certain

disparaging and damaging statements against the Petitioner. It will not be out of place

to mention here that this was never accidental but an evil conspiracy to lower the

Petitioner’s prestige. A true copy of the recordings has been annexed herewith as

Annexure 1.

8. That it is a matter of fact that even after the purported divorce the Defendant No. 1 has

been in constant touch with her former husband i.e. Defendant No. 2 and hence, have

been plotting schemes to malign the Petitioner and create impediments in his

professional and personal life.

9. That the said audio recording was circulated to extract money from the Petitioner as

both the Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 2 are aware of the Petitioner’s social

setup. The Defendant No. 1 had also made such defamatory speech public amongst his

colleagues and friends knowing very well that the Petitioner is due for promotion.

16
10. That it will not be out of place to mention here that the Defendants’ sinister conspiracy

endeavoured to lower the Petitioner’s prestige in the eyes of the colleagues and friends

in the Indian Army and neighbourhood by falsely projecting him as a man of poor

character and have given all members of society/community an opportunity to raise an

eye/ object on the Petitioner’s reputation and public image. Thus the acts of the

Defendants have caused the Petitioner’s character assassination and said false

statements have tarnished the good name of the Petitioner.

11. That it seems that the Defendants deliberately and knowingly with a malafide intention

to attack/tarnish the image of the Plaintiff made the said frivolous and vexatious

recordings circulated publically with some ulterior motive and malice while knowing it to

be false.

12. That the Defendants have made false and baseless allegations/imputation and gestures

in public only with an intent to defame the Petitioner and hurt his integrity therein

causing great mental, social, spiritual, and professional loss to the Petitioner for which

the Defendants are responsible and liable to pay damages to the Plaintiff.

13. That for the reasons disclosed above and for the words, representations, imputations

and gestures made and imputed/gestures by both the Defendants in public, they are

responsible for hurting, blackmailing and harming the Petitioner’s reputation. Thus, the

Defendants are liable to be prosecuted and punished for the offence of defamation with

imminent legal action.

14. The persistent conduct of the defendant in the past allows the reasonable apprehension

that they shall continue dispatching tarnishing messages to all and sundry to humiliate

17
 and bring further odium to the plaintiff. It is in these circumstances that the urgent

intervention of this Hon’ble Court is implored.

15. That the cause of action arose when the Defendant No. 1 proposed the Plaintiff for

marriage. The cause of action arose in February, 2016 when the defendants circulated

audio recordings on Whatsapp to the Petitioner’s colleague and common friends

containing certain disparaging and damaging statements against the Petitioner thereby

causing immense damage to the reputation and goodwill of the plaintiffs and lowered

their image in the eyes of the recipients of the impugned e-mail and numerous others.

The cause of action further arose on demanding payment of Rs. 20, 00, 000/- (Rupees

Twenty Lakhs) from the plaintiff with the intention to extort money from the

Plaintiff.The cause of action thus is continuing and subsisting.

16. That for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction and / or relief of damages the Suit is

valued at Rs. 20,00,100/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs One Hundred Only), on which the ad-

valorem court fees of Rs. 80,004/- (Eighty Thousand Four Only) is affixed. For the relief

of permanent injunction the relief is valued at Rs 5000/- on which the court fees of Rs.

500/- is affixed. Thus, a total court fee of Rs. 83000/- (Rupees Eighty Three Thousand

Only) has been affixed. This Hon’ble Court has the pecuniary jurisdiction to try and

adjudicate the present plaint. Any further court fees payable in respect of any punitive

damages awarded shall be paid as required.

17. That the Plaintiff and the Defendants have a place of permanent residence in New Delhi.

The plaintiffs and a number of the other recipients of the impugned audio recordings

dated February, 2016 are located in Delhi, thus the reputation and goodwill of the

plaintiff is, amongst other places, severely affected in Delhi. The Plaintiff and the

Defendants both have their place of work in Delhi. A significant part of the cause of

18
 action has arisen in Delhi. Hence, this Hon’ble Court has the territorial jurisdiction to

entertain the present Suit.

18. That the suit is within the period of limitation as provided for by the Limitation Act. That

no other or similar proceeding is filed or pending before any other Court and the

Plaintiff have no efficacious remedy but the instant Suit. The Plaintiff reserves the right

to present such additional facts, documents and grounds as may come to their

knowledge or possession hereafter.

19. That the instant petition is in the interest of justice and bona fide.

PRAYER

NOW WHEREFORE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY

BE PLEASED TO:-

a) Pass an order directing the Defendants to publish an unconditional apology in any two of the

National Daily Newspapers both in Delhi and Kolkata;

b) Pass an order directing the Defendants to give an unconditional apology through social

media by circulating the said message on Whatsapp, Facebook and any other social media

site to the Petitioner, his colleague and common friends;

c) Pass a decree/ order/ direction thereby awarding damages of Rs. 4, 00, 000/- (Rupees Four

Lakhs) against the defendant in favour of the Plaintiff towards loss of reputation and

goodwill and donate the same to the Bangla Sahib Gurudwara, Connaught Place for the

obnoxious acts done by the Defendants;

19
 d) Pass a decree / order / direction thereby awarding punitive damages against the defendant

in favour of the plaintiffs as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court, and / or;

e) Cost of the suit be awarded to the Plaintiff, and / or;

f) Any other relief that this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case,

in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant/s.

PLAINTIFF

VERIFICATION:

It is verified at ……….. on this the ……. day of …………, 2018 that the contents of paragraphs ............. to

………….of the plaint are true and correct to the best of our knowledge as well as based on

information derived from the records of the Plaintiff maintained in the ordinary course of business

and what is stated in paragraphs …… to is based upon information received and believed to be

true by us. Paragraph is the prayer to this Hon’ble Court.

PLAINTIFF

FILED THROUGH

20
 IN THE COURT OF ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

PATIALA HOUSE COURT, NEW DELHI

COMPLAINT NO. OF 2018

IN RE:

MANOJ KUMAR ARYA ….COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

LALIT SHARMA ….ACCUSED

EVIDENCE BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT

I, Manoj Kumar Arya, aged about 36 years, S/o Omendra Pal Singh, R/o Flat No. 67, Sector-12, R.K.
Puram, New Delhi – 110022, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:

1. That I am the complainant in the above noted case and is well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the case and is competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That the accompanying application to the above complaint, has been drafted by the counsel
under my instructions and the contents of the same are true and correct to my knowledge
and belief. The contents of the said application may be read as part and parcel of this
affidavit as the same are not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this day of October, 2018 that the contents of the affidavit
are true and correct to my knowledge and belief no part of it is false and
nothing has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT
DELHI

DATE

21
 IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS JUDGE (DISTRICT ),DELHI TIS HAZARI

COURT, DELHI

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF :-

ABC, S/o XYZ, R/o House No. 12, Delhi-110006 …Applicant

VERSUS

STATE …Respondent

FIR NO. of 2017

Under Section:

Police Station:

APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF ANTICPATORY BAIL UNDER SECTION 438 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL
PROCEDURE, 1973

The applicant most respectfully submits that:

1. That the applicant is a law abiding citizen of the country.

2. That he belongs to a respectable family and does not have criminal record.
3. That the applicant has been falsely implicated in the said matter and apprehends arrest over the same.
4. That the applicant has been married to his wife, Miss for a period of one year and also have child
from the marriage.
5. That a few months back, he found out that she was having an extra-marital affair with a friend of her’s.
Though he was shocked, he chose to forgive her for the sake of protecting their

22
 marriage and their child. However, she refused to stop her illicit affair and even refused to
seek divorce because the husband was financially secure.
6. That she has constantly being asking the applicant for money for her illicit activities, which
the applicant eventually refused. She had been threatening to file a fake case against him
under Section 498-A IPC, in a bid to falsely implicate him under the said offence unless he
pays heed to her demands. The complainant is extremely violent and often hurts herself. She
went to the extent of dangerously hurting herself physically to weave a fake case against the
applicant.
7. That the police has registered an FIR against the Applicant based on false allegations of his
wife. A bare perusal of the said FIR reveals that applicant has physically harmed his wife for
not meeting his demands for dowry. The wife has manipulated the facts and falsely
implicated the applicant and is in fact the victim of the devious schemes of the complainant.
8. That the FIR registered against the applicant is false and incorrect.
9. That the applicant undertakes to join the investigation as and when required to do so.
10. That the applicant is a permanent resident of Delhi and there is no chance of him absconding
in case he is granted anticipatory bail
11. That the applicant bears a good moral character and can prove the same before this Hon’ble
Court.

PRAYER

It is therefore most respectfully submitted that:

1. The applicant be released on bail in the event of his arrest.

2. Appropriate directions in this regard may please be sent to the concerned
SHO/ Investigating Officer.
3. The Hon’ble court may pass any other order that it deems fit and proper on the facts
and circumstances of the case.

APPLICANT
THROUGH
New Delhi ADVOCATE
Dated:

23
 ANNEXURE - A

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. OF 2013

IN

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 15426 / 2011

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/s Actia India Pvt. Ltd …..Petitioner

Versus

HKA Agencies and Ors. ….Respondents

PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 129 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH

SECTION 2(b) AND SECTION 12 OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT 1971 AND UNDER RULE
3(C) OF RULES TO REGULATE PROCEEDINGS FOR CONTEMPT OF SUPREME COURT,
1975

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Petitioner had filed the above captioned petition challenging the judgment dated

11th January, 2011 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in

Arbitration Appeal No. 2 of 2011.

The said petition was filed in the following back ground:

a) On March 4,2009 an award was passed in favour of the Petitioner wherein the details

of the amount awarded are as under:

“In total Rs. 2,52,79,787/- was awarded (comprising of principal sum of Rs.

2,30,43,558.72/- and interest upto the date of filing of the claim amounting to Rs.

12,36,228.68/- and the cost of Rs. 10 Lakhs) with interest on principal amount @

7.5% p.a post filing of statement claim until payment .”

24
b) That there after the Petitioner initiated the execution proceedings seeking execution

and enforcement of the award dated March 4, 2009 and filed an Execution Petition

no. 241 of 2009 before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court

c) The Respondents in the said execution raised the plea that the execution petition was

not maintainable before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court as “the branch concerned falls

within the jurisdiction of the Kerala High Court,” wherein the Respondents have filed

application being Arbitration O.P. No. 744 of 2009 challenging the award and

whereunder the District Court, Ernakulam has passed an interim order staying the

operation of the award.

d) Immediately, thereafter the petitioner entered appearance in the proceedings

pending before the District court Ernakulam and also filed an application being I.A

No. 104 of 2010 under Order 7 Rule 10 CPC interalia on the ground that since during

the pendency of the Arbitration proceedings, Actia(Petitioner) had filed before the

Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration

and Conciliation Act being OMP No. 655 of 2008 praying for the restraint order with

respect to the bank account of HKA and ors(Respondents), particulars of which were

given in the said petition under reference. The Respondents had entered appearance

and also filed their reply. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi vide its order

dated April 2, 2009 passed the order for attaching the amount lying deposited in the

said bank account of the Respondents with specific direction that the same shall not

be disbursed and disturbed till further orders and without the leave of the court. In

view thereof, in accordance with section 42 of the Act, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court

had exclusive jurisdiction in respect of all proceedings including petition under 34 of

the act to the exclusion of all other courts including the court at Ernakulam.

25
e) In view of the pendency of proceedings before Kerala District Court, the Hon’ble Delhi

High Court adjourned the execution Petition sine die with liberty to the parties to

revive the same as & when the occasion therefore arises.

f) The Petitioner’s application being I.A No. 104 of 2010 before the Ld. District Court

Ernakulam, Kerala for rejection of Respondents’ section 34 application on account of

section 42 of the Act, was allowed on 10.12.2010 and the Respondents’ application

under section 34 was directed to be returned.

g) That the Respondents still took their chances and challenged the said order of District

Judge before the Hon’ble Division Bench of Kerala High Court , which ultimately vide

its order dated January 11,2011 dismissed their appeal; however, despite the said

dismissal, the Division Bench in para 18 of the said judgment of January 11,2011

passed the direction permitting the Respondents to prefer section 34 application

before the Delhi High Court within 30 days.

h) On February 6, 2011 Respondents filed section 34 application before Delhi High

Court which on February 28, 2011 issued notice on Respondents’ application under

section 34 of the Act.

i) Aggrieved by the direction of the Hon’ble Division Bench Kerala High court, the

Petitioner preferred the abovementioned SLP before this Hon’ble Court.

j) In the SLP this Hon’ble Court vide its order dated July 6,2011 stayed the proceedings

before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the section 34 petition of the Judgement

Debtors being OMP no. 173 of 2011. Here to annexed and marked as ANNEXURE

______ is the copy of the said order dated July 6,2011.

26
2. Sometime around November, 2011 the parties i.e. the Petitioner and the Respondents

deliberated and reached an amicable settlement. A joint application being I.A. no. 2 of

2012 under order 23 Rule 3 CPC was filed before this Hon’ble Court. Here to annexed

and marked as ANNEXURE _______ is the copy of the joint application filed before this

Hon’ble Court.

3. As per the settlement as arrived between the parties, the Respondents were to pay Rs 2

crore to the Petitioner in full and final settlement of all dues; the said sum was to be paid

in twelve installments i.e. eleven PDCs of Rs 16,65,000/ and a demand draft of Rs

16,85,000/;.

4. The terms of settlement were incorporated in para 2 of the application ; under clause 2(g)

of the application the Respondents undertook that the post dated cheques shall be

honoured by their bank as and when they are presented for payment.

5. Under Clause 2( i) of the application it was agreed that on payment of Rs 2 crore by the

Respondents the award passed by the learned arbitrator dated Marc 4,2009 would stand

satisfied.

6. That the Hon’ble Supreme Court disposed off the aforementioned SLP on March 15,

2012 in terms of settlement as recorded in the joint application as referred hereinabove.

The following order was passed by this Hon’ble Court:

“IA 2 of 2011, has been filed in the Special Leave Petition, praying for the matter to be

disposed of, since the parties have arrived at a mutual settlement, which is part of the

application itself.

In terms of paragraph 2(d) of the application, a cheque for the sum of Rs. 16,65,000/- has

27
 been made over by the respondents to the petitioner’s learned advocate. Accordingly, let

the Special Leave petition be disposed of, in view of the settlement incorporated in the

application.”

Hereto annexed and marked as ANNEXURE _____ is the copy of the order dated March 15,

2012 passed by this Hon’ble Court.

7. That around one month after the order of this Hon’ble Court, the Respondents requested

for rescheduling of payment dates of its PDC’s and the demand draft. Hereto annexed

and marked as ANNEXURE _______ is the email dated 20.04.2012 by the Respondents

to the Petitioner. Agreeing to the Respondents’ request, the Petitioner presented the

cheques on the dates as confirmed by the Respondents.

8. That accordingly, out of the total agreed settled sum of Rs 2 Crore the Respondents paid

an amount of Rs 1,33,40,000/ only i.e. out of the twelve installments, eight installments

were duly paid.

9. That thereafter, however, for the remaining four installments totaling to Rs 66,60,000/

falling due from July 2012, the Respondents again requested for an accommodation to

extent of the deferment/rescheduling of payments on account of certain alleged financial

constraint as faced by them in their business.

10. That on the request of the Respondents, the Petitioner accordingly and bonafide

believing the request of the Respondents did not present the two cheques dated July 31,

2012 and August 31,2012 respectively on their due dates. Pertinent to mention that even

for the cheque dated June, 2012 the Petitioner on the request of Respondents further

accommodated the Respondents by extending the time with respect to the Payment of

Rs. 16,65000/- due against the cheque dated June, 2012. The said payment was made

by the Respondents in two installments in November 2012. The reason cited by

28
 Respondents for delayed payment was heavy income tax paid by the Respondents as a

result of which they pleaded inadequacy of funds in their accounts.

11. That thereafter as the Respondents were not forthcoming with the new date for the

presentation of the aforesaid cheques, several mails were issued by the Petitioner

inquiring as to by when he could present the cheques. To this, Respondents kept asking

for further time with repeated assurances portraying a very dismayed picture about the

Non availability of finances. The Respondents cited various reasons/excuses to the

Petitioner for non-payment. The patience of the Petitioner was being tested.

12. Ultimately, Respondents via email dated December 5, 2012 stated that for the balance 4

installments he needed some more time and he would clear the balance 4 installments

via 4 new cheques from Jan 30 to April 30 ,2013. In furtherance of the Respondents’

email and as per the recent RBI notification regarding the new format of the cheques the

Petitioner sent an e-mail dated December 6, 2012 to the Respondent asking for

reissuance of fresh cheques dated 30th December 2012, 30th January 2013, 28th

February 2012 and 30th march 2012

13. The copies of the emails exchanged between the Petitioner and the Respondent is

annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE _______ colly.

14. Unfortunately, no new/fresh cheques were issued.

15. That the Petitioner states that since the Respondents failed to issue new cheques, the

Petitioner on December 24,2012 presented the two cheques dated September 29,2012

and October 31, 2012 for Rs. 16,65,000/- each drawn on ING Vysya Bank Ltd

Pallrivattom Branch, Kochi 682025, for encashment. That both the cheques were

returned unpaid by the bankers of Respondents for the reason “funds insufficient”. The
29
 copy of the memos received from the Bank is annexed hereto and marked ANNEXURE

________ colly. That cheque dated October 31, 2012 was represented by the Petitioner

on January 18, 2013 but the same was again dishonoured. The copy of the memo

received from the Bank is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE _______.

16. That the Petitioner has issued legal notices under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument

Act, 1881 to the Respondents on January 25, 2013 and January 28, 2013 with respect to

cheque dated 29.09.2012 and 31.10.2012 respectively. Annexed hereto and marked

ANNEXURE _____ & ______ respectively are the copies of legal notices dated

25.01.2013 and 28.01.2013. It is submitted that the same was being issued without

prejudice to the right of the Petitioner to recover the entire due amount as per the original

award and to initiate the present contempt proceedings against the Respondents.

17. In the meanwhile, mails were exchanged between Petitioner and Respondents between

December 25, 2012 and January 21, 2013 i.e. subsequent to the presentation of two

cheques by Petitioner for encashment and before issuance of Legal Notices by Petitioner

to Respondents; the copies of mails is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE

_____ colly. In one of the mails dated December 31,2012 the Respondents informed that

they have issued a new cheque in lieu of the cheque which had become date invalid. The

said cheque was received by the Petitioner on January 5,2013 and is dated February

28,2013; subsequently in one of the mails dated 19.01.2013 the Respondents informed

that instead of the four due instalments, they can only pay two instalment and that too in

between March 15 & 30, 2013. The said mail was replied by Petitioner on 21.01.2013

informing that any renegotiation of the terms was not acceptable to the Petitioner.

18. It is submitted that the sequence of events as detailed herein above ex facie demonstrate

that the Respondents have not only deliberately and contumaciously not complied with

the terms of joint application filed before this Hon’ble Court in which the order dated
30
 March 15,2012 was passed by this Hon’ble Court but have also deliberately violated the

undertaking given to this Hon’ble Court under the said application and therefore, the

Respondents clearly are guilty of contempt of this Hon’ble Court.

19. It is submitted that since the Respondents have deliberately flouted the terms of

compromise/settlement, have deliberately failed to fulfill their commitment under the

settlement as recorded in the joint application filed before this Hon’ble Court and have

failed to pay the due amount for which undertaking was given them. Moreover, as the

Respondents /contemnors had failed to satisfy the award, as settled in terms of the

compromise, the Petitioner moved an application for the revival of the execution

proceedings before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court for recovering the remaining award

amount in which notice has been issued by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court .

20. It is submitted as the Respondents have not complied with the terms of joint application

filed before this Hon’ble Court and are guilty of violating and that too deliberately the

undertaking as given before this Hon’ble Court as well as the order of this Hon’ble Court

dated March 15, 2012 disposing the present matter in terms of the joint application, the

Petitioner is moving the present petition before this Hon’ble Court for initiation of

contempt proceedings against the Respondents.

21. It is submitted that the order dated March 15, 2012 passed by this Hon’ble Court was

based on the undertaking given by the Respondents to this Hon’ble Court. The

Respondents have deliberately and intentionally infringed and violated the order, which is

contumacious. It is settled law that breach of an injunction or breach of an undertaking

given to a court by a person in a civil proceeding on the faith of which the court sanctions

a particular course of action is misconduct amounting to contempt.

22. That the willful disobedience and breach of the settlement order Respondents constitutes

contempt of Court and the Respondents are liable to be proceeded against under article
31
 129 of the Constitution of India read with section 2 (b) and Section 12 of the Contempt of

Courts Act, 1971 and under Rule 3 (c) of the Rules to regulate proceedings for contempt

of Supreme Court, 1975.

23. That the present application is made bonafide and is in the interest of justice.

PRAYER

In the premises, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:-

a) pass an order holding the respondents guilty of committing contempt of Court by

deliberate and willful disobedience of the undertaking given by them to this Hon’ble Court

b) detain the respondents in civil prison

c) attach the properties of the Respondents for deliberately flouting the orders of this Court.

d) Pass such further or other order and/or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and
proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

PETITIONER

THROUGH:

O.P. KHAITAN & CO.

ADVOCATES FOR THE PETITIONER

NEW DELHI
DATED: FEBRUARY, 2013

32
 ANNEXURE - B

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

I.A. No. Of 2013

IN

EXECUTION PETITION NO. 241 of 2009

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/s ACTIA INDIA PVT. LTD. …DECREE HOLDER

VERSUS
HKA AGENCIES & ORS. …JUDGMENT DEBTORS

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 CPC FOR REVIVAL OF THE EXECUTION PETITION
NO. 241/2009

The Decree Holder/Applicant respectfully submit as under:

1. The Decree holder had filed the present execution proceedings seeking execution and

enforcement of the award dated March 4, 2009 passed in favour of the decree holder

by the learned arbitrator Justice A.M. Ahmadi (Retd).The details of the amount as

awarded by the learned arbitrator are as under:

In total Rs. 2,52,79,787/- was awarded (comprising of principal sum of Rs.

2,30,43,558.72/- and interest upto the date of filing of the claim amounting to Rs.

12,36,228.68/- and the cost of Rs. 10 Lakhs) with interest on principal amount @ 7.5%

p.a. post filing of statement claim until payment .

2. By an order dated 30.09.2010, this Hon’ble Court was pleased to adjourn the present execution

proceedings sine die with liberty to the parties to revive the same. The said order was passed in the

following back ground:

a) In the present execution proceedings this Hon’ble Court vide its Order dated

October 07,2009 had directed the Judgment/Debtors to interalia “file affidavits

33
 before the next date of hearing disclosing all their assets and properties both

movable and immovable including bank a/c and also to disclose about sales

encumbrances if any of their assets after making of the award”

b) Pursuant to the said order, the Judgment Debtors filed the Counter Affidavit

raising the plea that the present execution petition was not maintainable before

this Hon’ble Court as “the branch concerned falls within the jurisdiction of the

Kerala High Court,” wherein the Judgment Debtors have filed application being

Arbitration O.P. No. 744 of 2009 challenging the award and whereunder the

District Court, Ernakulam has passed an interim order staying the operation of

the award.

c) In response there to the decree holder in its rejoinder affidavit clarified that till

the time of filing of the present execution petition, neither was the Decree Holder

aware of the proceedings initiated by the Judgment Debtors in the District Court

Ernakulam, Kerala nor had it received any notice to that effect; It was only

subsequent to the filing of the present petition that the Decree Holder was served

with a court notice of the proceedings pending in the District Court, Ernakulam.

d) Immediately, thereafter the Decree Holder entered appearance in the said

proceedings and also filed an application being I.A No. 104 of 2010 under Order

7 Rule 10 CPC interalia on the ground that since during the pendency of the

Arbitration proceedings, Actia(Decree Holder) had filed before the Hon’ble High

Court of Delhi at New Delhi a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act being OMP No. 655 of 2008 praying for the restraint order with

respect to the bank account of HKA and ors(Judgment Debtors), particulars of

which were given in the said petition under reference. The Judgment debtors had

entered appearance and also filed their reply. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at

New Delhi vide its order dated Aprial 2, 2009 passed the order for attaching the

amount lying deposited in the said bank account of the Judgment Debtor with

specific direction that the same shall not be disbursed and disturbed till further
34
 orders and without the leave of the court. In view thereof, in accordance with

section 42 of the Act, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court had exclusive jurisdiction in

respect of all proceedings including petition under 34 of the act to the exclusion

of all other courts including the court at Ernakulam.

3. In view of the pendency of proceedings before Kerala District Court, this Hon’ble Court adjourned

the present Petition sine die with liberty to the parties to revive the same as & when the occasion

therefore arises.

4. It is stated that the decree holder’s application being I.A No. 104 of 2010 before the district court

Erankulam, Kerala for rejection of Judgment Debtors’ section 34 application on account of section

42 of the Act, was allowed on 10.12.2010 and the Judgment debtors’ application under section 34

was directed to be returned. Here to annexed and marked as ANNEXURE ______ is the copy of

the said order dated 10.12.2010 passed by district Court , Ernakulam, Kerala.

5. That the Judgment Debtors still took their chances and challenged the said order of District Judge

before the Hon’ble Division Bench of Kerala High Court , which ultimately vide its order dated

January 11,2011 dismissed their appeal; however, despite the said dismissal, the Division Bench

in para 18 of the said judgment of January 11,2011 passed the direction permitting the Judgment

Debtor to prefer section 34 application before the Delhi High Court within 30 days. Here to

annexed and marked as ANNEXURE _______ is the copy of the said order dated 11.01.2011

passed by Hon’ble Division Bench of Kerala High Court.

6. On February 6, 2011 Judgment Debtors filed section 34 application before Delhi High Court

which on February 28, 2011 issued notice on judgment Debtors’ application under section 34 of

the Act.

7. Aggrieved by the direction of the Hon’ble Division Bench Kerala High court, the Decree Holder
35
 preferred an SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

8. In the SLP as filed by the Decree Holder, the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated July

6,2011 stayed the proceedings before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the section 34 petition of

the judgment debtors being OMP no. 173 of 2011. Here to annexed and marked as ANNEXURE

_____ is the copy of the said order dated July 6, 2011.

9. Sometime around November, 2011 the parties i.e. decree holder as well as judgment debtors

deliberated and reached an amicable settlement. A joint application under order 23 rule 3 CPC was

filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Here to annexed and marked as ANNEXURE _____ is

the copy of the joint application being I.A No. 2 of 2011 as filed before the Hon’ble Supreme

Court.

10. As per the settlement as arrived between the parties , the judgment debtors were to pay Rs 2 crore

to the decree holder in full and final settlement of all dues; the said sum was to be paid in twelve

installments i.e. eleven PDCs of Rs 16,65,000/ and a demand draft of Rs 16,85,000/;.

The terms of settlement are in para 2 of the application ; in clause 2(g) the judgment debtors

undertook that the post dated cheques shall be honored by their bank as and when they are

presented for payment.

Under Clause 2( i) of the application it was agreed that on payment of Rs 2 crore by the judgment

debtors the award passed by the learned arbitrator dated Marc 4,2009 would stand satisfied.

11. That the Hon’ble Supreme Court disposed off the aforementioned SLP on March 15, 2012 in

terms of settlement as recorded in the joint application as referred hereinabove. Hereto annexed

and marked as ANNEXURE _____ is the copy of order dated March 15, 2012 passed by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court. Pertinent to mention that around one month after the order of Supreme

Court, the Judgment Debtors requested for rescheduling of payment dates of its PDCS and the dd-

--- hereto annexed and marked as ANNEXURE ____ dated 20.04.2012 by the Judgment Debtors
36
 to the Decree Holder. Receiving the Judgment debtor request, the Decree holder presented the

cheques on the defendant is confirmed by the Judgment Holders.

12. That the Decree Holder states that out of the total agreed settled sum of Rs 2 Crore the judgment

debtors paid an amount of Rs 1,33,40,000/ only i.e. out of the twelve installments, eight

installments were duly paid. However, for the remaining four installments totaling to Rs

66,60,000/ falling due from July 2012, the judgment debtors again requested for an

accommodation on account of certain financial constraint as faced by them in their business. On

the request of the judgment debtors, the Decree holder did not present the two cheques dated July

31,2012 and August 31, 2012 respectively. Pertinent to mention that even for the cheque dated

June, 2012 the Decree Holder on the request of Judgment Debtors further accommodated the

Judgment Debtors by extending the time with respect to the Payment of Rs. 16,65000/- due

against the cheque dated June 26, 2012. The said payment was made by the Judgment Debtors in

two installments 4 November 2012. The reason cited by Judgment Debtors for delayed payment

was heavy income tax paid by the Judgment Debtors as a result of which they pleaded inadequate

-----of funds in their accounts.

13. That thereafter several mails were exchanged between the parties wherein the decree holder kept

asking as to by when he could present the cheques. Several assurances were given to the decree

holder by the judgment debtors and a very dismayed picture was portrayed about the Non

availability of finances. The Judgment Debtors cited various reasons/excuses to the decree holder

for non-payment. The patience of the decree holder was being tested.

The Judgment Debtor via email dated December 5, 2012 stated that for the balance 4 installments

he needed some more time and he would clear the balance 4 installments via 4 new cheques from

Jan 30 to April 30 ,2013. In furtherance of the Judgment Debtor’s email and as per the recent RBI

notification regarding the new format of the cheques the Decree holder sent an e-mail dated

December 6, 2012 to the Judgment Debtor asking for reissuance of fresh cheques dated 30th

December 2012, 30th January 2013, 28th February 2012 and 30th march 2012
37
 The copies of the emails exchanged between the Decree holder and the Judgment Debtor is

annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE ____

14. Perusal of the same reveals and substantiates that fact that the judgment debtors had requested for

the deferment of payment date and not for the reduction of the amount due ; in larger interest the

decree holder agreed for the same. Taking advantage of the leniency as shown by the decree

holder, the judgment debtors acted in defiance of the agreement and the undertaking as given

before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

15. That the decree holder states that Since the Judgment Debtors failed to issue new cheques, the

decree holder on December 24,2012 presented the two cheques dated September 29,2012 and

October 31, 2012 for Rs. 16,65,000/- each drawn on ING Vysya Bank Ltd Pallrivattom Branch,

Kochi 682025, for encashment. That both the cheques were returned unpaid by the bankers of

Judgment Debtors for the reason “funds insufficient”. The copy of the memo received from the

Bank is annexed hereto and marked ANNEXURE _____. That cheque dated October 31, 2012

was represented by the Decree holder on January 18, 2013 but the same was again dishonored.

The copy of the memo received from the Bank is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE

_____. That the Decree holder has issued legal notices under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument

Act, 1881 to the Judgment Debtors on January 25, 2013 and January 28, 2013 with respect to

cheque dated 29.09.2012 and 31.10.2012 respectively. ANNEXURE _____ hereto and marked

ANNEXURE ____ & _____ respectively are the copies of legal notices dated 25.01.2013 and

28.01.2013.

16 It is submitted that the Judgment Debtors have not complied with the joint application filed before

the Hon’ble Supreme Court and are also guilty of violating the undertaking as given before the

Hon’ble Supreme Court for which the Decree holder would be taking appropriate steps. That the

Decree holder is also filing herewith the copies of mails exchanged between Decree holder and

Judgment Debtors between December 25, 2012 and January 21, 2013 i.e. subsequent to the
38
 presentation of two cheques by Decree Holder for encashment and before issuance of Legal

Notices by Decree Holder and Judgment Debtors, the copies of mails is annexed hereto and

marked as ANNEXURE _____ colly. In one of the mails dated 19.01.2013 the Judgment Debtors

informed that instead of the four due installments, they can only pay two installment and that too

in between March 15 & 30, 2013. The said mail was replied by Decree Holder on 21.01.2013

informing that any renegotiation of the terms was not acceptable to the Decree Holder. It is

submitted that the same is being issued without prejudice to the right of the decree holder to

recover the entire due amount as per the original award.

17. It is submitted that since the Judgment Debtors have broken the terms of compromise/settlement,

have failed to fulfil their commitment under the settlement as recorded in the joint application

filed before the Supreme court and have failed to pay the undertaken due amount, the non-

payment by the Judgment debtors entitles the Decree holder to recover the entire original amount

due for which the Decree Holder is moving the present application for the revival of the execution

proceedings before this Hon’ble Court . It is submitted that the present is a fit case for the

recovery of the entire outstanding amount.

18. It is pertinent to mention that as per clause 2(h) of the joint application moved before the Hon’ble

Supreme Court the parties had inter alia agreed that on disposal of the petition in terms of the

settlement , the judgment debtors would withdraw OMP no. 173 of 2011 filed before the Hon’ble

Delhi High court and the decree holder would withdraw the above captioned execution petition

being 241 of 2009 before this Hon’ble Court.

19. It is stated that neither the judgment debtors withdrew their section 34 nor did the Decree holder

withdrew its execution. It is stated that since the Judgment debtors were not complying with the

terms of settlement, the question/opportunity of Decree Holder withdrawing the execution never

arose.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the decree holder is seeking the revival of the
39
 above captioned execution petition which was adjourned sine die. The revival is sought for the

purposes of recovering the due decreetal amount.

20. In the aforesaid circumstances, the execution proceedings may be revived and proceeded with by

this Hon’ble Court. Accordingly, the Decree Holder is filing the present application.

PRAYER

The Decree Holder most respectfully pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

(a) direct revival of the Execution Petition No.241/2009; and

(b) pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper

in the interest of justice.

DECREE HOLDER/APPLICANT

THROUGH:

NEW DELHI

BHARTI BADESRA
O.P.KHAITAN & CO,
ADVOCATES FOR THE DECREE HOLDER/APPLICANT
KHAITAN HOUSE
B-1, DEFENCE COLONY
NEW DELHI-110024
PH. 46501000
DATED: FEBRUARY __, 2013

40
41
Court I Chamber Visited: .........................Saket.............................................................................................................. .

Date: ..20/3/2024.................... Time: ............................................ From: ................................ To: ..............................

Observations of the student about the work done

It is said that practical knowledge is far better than the knowledge one gets from books which
was finely proved to me during the course of my internship. I worked in Gujarat High court,
Ahmedabad under Adv. Upender. High court are the principal civil courts of original
jurisdiction in each and state and union territory.

The major learning outcome from the internship was-

 Improvement and refining analytical and communication skills.

 Gaining exposure to a breadth of criminal law.

 Engaging in a strong, supportive mentoring relationship with advocates.

 Gaining a unique perspective of how a court works.

 Learnt the difference between good and bad advocacy from reading briefs and
watching oral arguments.

After reading several cases, I have learned so many various things which are very necessary
for a law student to know. I observed that a lawyer must have good and wide range of
contacts and only if he would have contacts then he would be worth and he would have large
number of cases and it would help him in doing his work at ease. Even the good lawyers with
good contacts are favored by the judges. It was also observed that lawyers for their client’s
sake do mold the facts and do speak flawless lies so that their clients are saved.

Signature of the Authority: ........................................................................................................................................ .

The internship provided me with great exposure knowledge, network and helped me mold myself
professionally and personally. It has helped me stay calm and positive and has as well added a new
experience in my life. It specifically has taught me the importance of knowing your basics right. I have
learnt and gained in:

 Improvement and refining analytical and communication skills.

 Gaining exposure to a breadth of criminal law.

 Engaging in a strong, supportive mentoring relationship with advocates.

 Gaining a unique perspective of how a court works.

 Learnt the difference between good and bad advocacy from reading briefs and watching oral
arguments.
MERI
GROUP OF INSTITUTIONS <Jfcrious gear of
'El(pnp(my 'Lfucatwn

MERI GROUP OF INSTITUTIONS

Motivation Enterprise Resilience Innovation
A+ Grade Institute by GGSIPU & Govt. of NCT of Delhi, NAAC Accredited,
AICTE & BCI Approved, Affiliated to GGSIP University, New Delhi & MDU, Rohtak.

MERI Professional and Law Institute MERI College of Engineering and Technology

Ramakrishna MERI Management Education and Ramakrishna Teacher

Senior Secondary School Research Institute Training Institute

BBA•MBA•BCA•B.COM(H)•B.TECH•M.TECH•BA(JMC) •BA.LLB•BBA.LLB•LLB•LLM
A Community with High Expectation and High Academic Achievement.

E-mail: meribs@meri.edu.in • Website: https://meri.edu.in • Helpline No.: 9555369369