Delhi District Court
Whether The Relief Of Declaration ... vs Apmc on 26 July, 2011
One application for seeking personal exemption on behalf of complainant is filed.
Heard. In the interest of justice allowed, however only for today.
One application for seeking personal exemption on behalf of accused is filed.
Heard. In the interest of justice allowed, however only for today.
One application for substitution of AR of complainant is filed. Heard. Allowed. Sh.
Aditya Narain Pandey is substituted as new AR in place of previous AR.
In the interest of justice accused is admitted on bail on his furnishing personal
bond for the sum of Rs. 10,000/ with one surety of the like amount. Bail bond
furnished and accepted.
Steps not taken. One opportunity is prayed for. In the interest of justice one
opportunity is granted. Issue process afresh against the accused as per previous
order on filing of PF/RC for
Process not received back. Be awaited. In the meantime issue process afresh
against the accused as per previous order on filing of PF/RC for
Defendant has not filed the Written Statement. Counsel for defendant seeks some
time for filing the WS. Not opposed. At request matter is adjourned.
Put up for filing of WS/reply for
Suit No. 47A/11
06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for plaintiff.
Sh. Shanker Parsad Proxy counsel for defendant no. 1.
Defendant no. 2 unserved.
Record perused.
Steps have not been taken on behalf of the plaintiff. Proxy
counsel Sh. Shanker Parsad for Sh. Mahinder Sharma is present of his own.
Previous cost is also paid on behalf of the plaintiff. At
request in the interest of justice one opportunity is granted. Defendant no. 2 be
served afresh on filing of PF/RC.
Put up for payment of cost , service of defendant no. 2
and for filing of WS/reply for 23.09.2011.
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 287/09
06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for plaintiff.
Counsel for LRs of deceased defendants.
Vakalatnamha is filed on behalf of the LRs of deceased
defendant.
Arguments on application filed under order 22 Rule 4 CPC
heard at length.
Record perused.
This suit is filed for recovery against defendant since
deceased. From the averment so made in the plaint , I am of the opinion that right
of suit is survivie upon the LRs of deceased defendant. Hence the application filed
under order 22 Rule 4 CPC is allowed. Amended memo is filed on record. It is
alleged on behalf of the LRs of deceased defendant that copy of plaint and
documents may be supplied afresh to the LRs of deceased . Thus, at their request
plaintiff is directed to be supply the copy of plaint to the LRs of deceased
defendants on or before the next date of hearing.
Record perused again.
Matter is at the stage of PE.
Put up for filing the amended memo of parties and for PE for
05.10.2011.
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 288/09
06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for plaintiff.
Counsel for LRs of deceased defendants.
Vakalatnamha is filed on behalf of the LRs of deceased
defendant.
Arguments on application filed under order 22 Rule 4 CPC
heard at length.
Record perused.
This suit is filed for recovery against defendant since
deceased. From the averment so made in the plaint , I am of the opinion that right
of suit is survivie upon the LRs of deceased defendant. Hence the application filed
under order 22 Rule 4 CPC is allowed. Amended memo is filed on record. It is
alleged on behalf of the LRs of deceased defendant that copy of plaint and
documents may be supplied afresh to the LRs of deceased . Thus, at their request
plaintiff is directed to be supply the copy of plaint to the LRs of deceased
defendants on or before the next date of hearing.
Record perused again.
Matter is at the stage of PE.
Put up for filing the amended memo of parties and for PE for
05.10.2011.
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 289/09
06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for plaintiff.
Counsel for LRs of deceased defendants.
Vakalatnamha is filed on behalf of the LRs of deceased
defendant.
Arguments on application filed under order 22 Rule 4 CPC
heard at length.
Record perused.
This suit is filed for recovery against defendant since
deceased. From the averment so made in the plaint , I am of the opinion that right
of suit is survivie upon the LRs of deceased defendant. Hence the application filed
under order 22 Rule 4 CPC is allowed. Amended memo is filed on record. It is
alleged on behalf of the LRs of deceased defendant that copy of plaint and
documents may be supplied afresh to the LRs of deceased . Thus, at their request
plaintiff is directed to be supply the copy of plaint to the LRs of deceased
defendants on or before the next date of hearing.
Record perused again.
Matter is at the stage of PE.
Put up for filing the amended memo of parties and for PE for
05.10.2011.
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 31/10
06.08.2011 Present : Plaintiff in person.
Counsel for NDPL.
Order of Mediation Cell is perused. In the light of the
directions given in the said order dated 04.08.2011 put up for payment for
27.08.2011
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 956/09
06.08.2011 Present : Sh. Mukesh Sharma for plaintiff.
Counsel for defendant.
Counsel for defendant prays for one opportunity for making
the payment. Thus, at request one opportunity is granted.
Put up for settlement/further proceedings for 23.09.2011
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 456/10
06.08.2011 Present : Plaintiff in person.
Proxy counsel for defendant.
It is alleged on behalf of the plaintiff that commercial
formalities has been completed by him and electricity has been restored in the
premises. Plaintiff prays for short adjournment. Adjournment is not opposed by the
counsel for defendant. Thus, at request matter is adjourned .
Put up for further proceedings for 22.09.2011
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 328/11
06.08.2011 Present : Proxy counsel for plaintiff.
Counsel for defendant.
Vakalatnamha is filed on behalf of the defendant. It is taken
on record.
Defendant has not filed the Written Statement. Counsel for
defendant seeks some time for filing the WS. Not opposed. At request matter is
adjourned.
Put up for filing of WS/reply for 28.09.2011.
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 753/09
06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for plaintiff alongwith PW.
Counsel for defendant.
Previous cost paid.
Pws are present, however, adjournment is prayed on behalf
of the defendant alleging that son of main counsel is not feeling well. Adjournment
is not opposed by the counsel for plaintiff. Thus, at request of the defendant
matter is adjourned.
Put up for PE for 08.08.2011 at 10.30 a.m. Sharp.
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 334/10
06.08.2011 Present : Plaintiff in person.
Counsel for NDPL.
Son of defendant no. 2.
NO PW is present.
Adjournment is prayed on behalf of the plaintiff alleging that
no PW is present today . Adjournment is not opposed by the counsel for
defendant. Thus, at request matter is adjourned.
Put up for PE for 24.09.2011
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 472/10
06.08.2011 Present : Plaintiff with counsel.
Counsel for defendant.
PW 2 crossexamined and his further crossexamination is
deferred for want of some document. Thus, at request matter is adjourned.
Put up PE for 20.09.2011
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 435/10
06.08.2011 Present : Husband of plaintiff alongwith counsel.
Defendant with counsel.
DW is present. One affidavit is filed. Copies are stated to
have been supplied. However, this fact is denied by the plaintiff. One set of
affidavit is supplied today in the court which is received by the plaintiff.
Adjournment is prayed on behalf of the plaintiff alleging that copies of documents
have been supplied today in the court. Thus, at request one opportunity is
granted.
Put up for DE for 01.10.2011.
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 510/10
06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for plaintiff.
Defendant unserved.
Issue process afresh against the defendant on filing of
PF/RC for 26.09.2011.
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 329/11
06.08.2011 Present : Plaintiff with counsel.
Counsel for all the defendants.
Counsel for defendant prays for one opportunity for filing the
WS on behalf of the defendant no. 1 & 2. Adjournment is strongly opposed by the
counsel for plaintiff alleging that more than 30 days have been passed after the
service upon the defendant and WS has not been filed till date. The counsel for
defendant prays for one more opportunity for filing the WS on behalf of defendant
no. 1 & 2 shall be considered accordingly subject to the objections taken by the
plaintiff and as and when it is filed.
Record perused again.
This is the first adjournment sought on behalf of the
defendant , thus, in the interest of justice as per the submissions made on behalf
of the parties matter is adjourned.
Put up for filing of WS/reply for 19.09.2011
Interim order continues.
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Suit No. 707/10
06.08.2011 Present : counsel for plaintiff.
Counsel for defendant.
Record perused.
Pleadings are complete. Admission and denial of documents
has not been conducted by the parties. Thus, at request of the parties following
issues are framed which is as under:
1. Whether the relief of declaration declaring the Will dated 16.11.2004 as
false and fabricated as prayed for ?(OPP)
2. Any other relief.
No other issue is to be framed nor pressed for.
Put up for PE for 30.09.2011
Advance copy of affidavit be supplied one week before the
next date of hearing to the defendant.
List of documents, if any be supplied to the defendant within
15 days from today.
(Prashant Kumar)
CCJcumARC/NorthWest
Rohini Courts/Delhi
06.08.2011
Case No. M 6/11
06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for petitioner
Counsel for all the respondents.
It is alleged on behalf of the respondent that copy of reply has not been supplied. It is stated on behalf of petitioner that one set of reply has been supplied, however another set of reply is supplied by the petitioner to the respondent. Thus, at joint request matter is adjourned.
Put up for arguments for 10.08.2011.
(Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Case No. RC 83/09 06.08.2011 Present : Proxy counsel for petitioner.
Counsel for respondent.
Matter is at the stage of final arguments, however, one application under order 18 Rule 17 CPC is filed on behalf of the respondent. Copies are supplied alongwith documents. The counsel for petitioner prays for one opportunity for filing the reply on this application. Thus, at request matter is adjourned.
Put up for filing the reply and arguments for 23.08.2011.
(Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Case No. DR 41/11 06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for petitioner.
Husband of respondent.
At joint request matter is adjourned. Put up for arguments for 19.09.2011 (Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Suit No. 226/09 06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for plaintiff.
None for defendant.
It is alleged on behalf of the counsel for plaintiff that only one more witness is to be examined namely Goverdhan Dass who is father of plaintiff. The affidavit of Sh. Goverdhan Dass is filed on record alongwith the copy of the same. None is present on behalf of the defendant despite several calls. Counsel for plaintiff prays for one opportunity . In these circumstances no adverse order is to be passed against the defendant.
Put up for consideration of the parties and for PE for 26.09.2011 (Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Suit No. 705/09 06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for plaintiff .
Defendant no. 2 in person and on behalf of defendant no. 1 & 3.
LRs of deceased defendant no. 4 absent. Record perused.
Perusal of the record reflects that amended memo of parties has not been filed as per the law. The counsel for plaintiff prays for filing fresh amended memo of parties on record on next date of hearing. At request one opportunity is granted. Defendant no. 2 who is present today in the Court, has alleged that he is ready and willing to make the payment and is ready for settlement. Thus, at request matter is adjourned.
Put up for settlement for 01.10.2011 (Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Case No. 4/10 06.08.2011 Present :Counsel for petitioner.
Counsel for respondent.
Arguments on preliminary objections are heard in part. It is reflected from the record that the main file has not been annexed alongwith this revision. Under these circumstances, as per the request of the petitioner issue Robkar accordingly for summoning the main file in the suit bearing no. 225/10 tilted as Fruits and Vegetables Vs. APMC.
Robkar be issued accordingly.
Put up for further arguments for 03.09.2011 (Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Suit No 579/09 06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for plaintiff.
Counsel for defendant with DW 1 & 2 DW 1 is crossexamined and discharged. Put up for remaining DE for 26.09.2011 (Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Suit No 06.08.2011 Present : Sh. Satender Kumar, Proxy counsel for plaintiff alongwith PW Ms. Saroj Sharma.
Counsel for defendant.
Previous cost paid.
One affidavit has already been filed on behalf of Smt. Saroj Sharma. Copies are stated to have been supplied to the counsel for defendant already. It is submitted on behalf of the plaintiff that Smt. Saroj Sharma may be examined in place of the plaintiff as the plaintiff is not keeping well and cannot come to the Court to depose on her behalf. Neither plaintiff in person nor main counsel for plaintiff is present whose statement can be recorded as per the law to this effect.
At this statge Sh. Tarun Walia, counsel for plaintiff is present on behalf of plaintiff who is one of the counsel in the suit on behalf of the plaintiff. Statement of Sh. Tarun Walia, counsel for plaintiff is recorded vide separate order sheet. IN the light of the statement of the counsel for plaintiff the counsel for defendant has no objection , if Smt. Saroj Sharma is examined on behalf of the plaintiff. At this stage at the request of the parties matter is adjourned.
Put up for PE for 24.09.2011 (Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Suit No 423/11 06.08.2011 Fresh suit received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered.
Present : Counsel for plaintiff.
Heard. Record perused.
Present suit is filed under order 37 CPC. Issue summons to the defendant under order 37 CPC on filing of PF/RC for 28.09.2011 (Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Suit No 422/11 06.08.2011 Fresh suit received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered.
Present : Counsel for plaintiff.
Heard. Record perused.
Present suit is filed for mandatory injunction, mesne profits and damages and for permanent injunction alongwith application under order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC.
Issue summons to the defendant alongwith notice of the application to the defendant on filing of PF/RC for 26.09.2011 Steps be taken within a week.
(Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Suit No 422/10 06.08.2011 Present : Counsel for plaintiff.
Counsel for defendant no. 1, 2 and 4. Defendant no. 3 with counsel.
Arguments on application filed under order 40 CPC for appointment of receiver heard at length. During arguments the counsel for defendant no. 3 has stated that he has no objection if the application filed by the plaintiff is allowed and receiver is appointed . It is alleged on behalf of the plaintiff during arguments that defendant no. 1, 2, and 4 are not properly accounting the money which belongs to the general public received by the Gurudwara, therefore, the account books of Gurudwara be taken in possession by the receiver as per the order of the Court. The counsel for defendant no. 1 , 2 and 4 has stated during arguments that they shall place on record all the relevant documents i.e. Accounts books , therefore, audit record alongwith the documents may be filed on record on or before the next date of hearing.
As per the submissions made on behalf of the defendant no. 1, 2 and 4 one opportunity is granted for filing the relevant record pertaining to the records and their concerned audit report for the last three years on record alongwith the other documents under their possession on or before the next date of hearing. The application under these circumstances is kept pending till next date of hearing.
Put up for further arguments on the application filed under order 40 Cr.P.C. For 14.09.2011.
(Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Suit No 320/11 06.08.2011 Present : Plaintiff with counsel.
Proxy counsel for defendant.
Adjournment is prayed on behalf of the defendant expressing the personal difficulty of the main counsel. Adjournment is not opposed by the counsel for defendant. Thus at request matter is adjourned.
Put up for arguments for 24.08.2011 at 2.00 p.m. (Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Suit No 921/09 06.08.2011 Present : Plaintiff with counsel.
Counsel for defendant.
Matter is at the stage of final arguments. However, adjournment is again prayed on behalf of the defendant expressing his personal difficulty. Adjournment is strongly opposed by the counsel for plaintiff. However, in the interest of justice adjournment is allowed .
Put up for final arguments for 18.08.2011. This is last and final opportunity for final arguments. No further opportunity shall be granted for final arguments.
(Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011 Suit No 227/09 06.08.2011 Present : Plaintiff in person.
Defendant absent.
Reply filed by the plaintiff alongwith copies. None is present for defendant despite several calls . At the request of the plaintiff , however, matter is adjourned. In these circumstances, no adverse order is to be passed against the defendant.
Put up for arguments for 21.09.2011 (Prashant Kumar) CCJcumARC/NorthWest Rohini Courts/Delhi 06.08.2011