Delhi District Court
Ms. Meenu Bansal vs . M/S Dd Merchant Bankers Ltd. on 10 February, 2012
Ms. Meenu Bansal Vs. M/s DD Merchant Bankers Ltd. C.C.No.5898/11 10.02.2012
Statement of Ms. Meenu Bansal, Complainant. On S.A. I, the above named complainant do hereby state that the matter has been amicably settled with the accused company in full and final settlement. I have received all the settled amount from the accused and all the disputes in respect of the present case have been resolved amicably with the accused company. I have, therefore, no grievance against the accused company and nothing remains due towards the accused company.
Therefore, the matter may be allowed to be treated as compounded U/s 147 NI Act. RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 Ms. Meenu Bansal Vs. M/s DD Merchant Bankers Ltd.
C.C.No.5787/11 10.02.2012 Statement of Ms. Meenu Bansal, Complainant. On S.A. I, the above named complainant do hereby state that the matter has been amicably settled with the accused company in full and final settlement. I have received all the settled amount from the accused and all the disputes in respect of the present case have been resolved amicably with the accused company. I have, therefore, no grievance against the accused company and nothing remains due towards the accused company.
Therefore, the matter may be allowed to be treated as compounded U/s 147 NI Act. RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 Ms. Meenu Bansal Vs. M/s DD Merchant Bankers Ltd.
C.C.No.5899/1110.02.2012 Statement of Ms. Meenu Bansal, Complainant. On S.A. I, the above named complainant do hereby state that the matter has been amicably settled with the accused company in full and final settlement. I have received all the settled amount from the accused and all the disputes in respect of the present case have been resolved amicably with the accused company. I have, therefore, no grievance against the accused company and nothing remains due towards the accused company.
Therefore, the matter may be allowed to be treated as compounded U/s 147 NI Act. RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 Ms. Meenu Bansal Vs. M/s DD Merchant Bankers Ltd.
C.C.No.5787/11, 5898/11 & 5899/11 10.02.2012 Present: Complainant with counsel.
Ld. Counsel for the accused.
These are three connected matters.
The matter is settled.
Separate statement of complainant recorded in this respect.
Let the file be put up in Lok Adalat to be held on 11.02.2012 for final disposal.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Brite Plywood Agencies Vs. S.P. Neon Sign Boards C.C.No.6511/12 10.02.2012 Statement of Mr. Pradeep Kumar Sethi, AR of the complainant firm. On S.A. I, the above named AR of the complainant firm do hereby tender my evidence by way of affidavit Exh.CW1/H which bears my signatures at Point A and Point B. I hereby close my Pre- summoning evidence.
RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Paras Holidays (P) Ltd. Vs. Ms. Roopali Aggarwal C.C.No.5765/11 10.02.2012 Statement of Mr. Ramji Lal, Postman, Beat No.16, Karol Bagh Post Office, New Delhi-110005. On S.A. I have brought the summoned record today and as well as photocopy of the same. Copy of the same is Exh.DW1/A (OSR).
XXXXX by Mr. Satish Bajaj, Ld. Counsel for the complainant company.
I do not know as to who received the envelope nor I cannot tell who signed Exh.DW1/A at Point X. I gave the envelope to one person in the office of the addressee who took the same inside the room and got it signed. During those days, there were two Postman on the Beat. There is no signature of mine on the page Mark-Y on which the alleged signature of the addressee is there. However, this document bears my signature on the front page. It is wrong to suggest that I am deposing falsely.
RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Paras Holidays (P) Ltd. Vs. Ms. Roopali Aggarwal C.C.No.5765/11 10.02.2012 Statement of Mr. Gyan Chand, Postman, Beat No.10, Civil Lines Post Office, Delhi-110054. On S.A. I have delivered an article as per record at 616 which was in Beat No.10. Western Wing also falls within it. It was received by a person who signed it in my presence. XXXXX by Mr. Satish Bajaj, Ld. Counsel for the complainant company.
I have not brought any record pertaining to the delivery of alleged article nor I can tell who had received the same. There are two postman in Beat No.10. I do not know on which date which article is delivered to any person nor I cannot remember without seeing the record. Without record I cannot tell on which date the alleged article was delivered. It is wrong that I did not deliver any article or that I am making a false statement.
RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Paras Holidays (P) Ltd. Vs. Ms. Roopali Aggarwal C.C.No.5765/11 10.02.2012 Statement of Dr. Roopali Aggarwal, Accused. On S.A. As it was declared by Delhi Govt. that schools will remain close from 01.10.2010 to 17.10.2010, so as my husband was posted in Sudan, Africa in UN Mission from May-2010, so we decided to utilize these holidays by meeting in Europe. My husband searched through Internet for the Europe Group Tour Package for the above said period. My husband sent the E-mail dated 11.08.2010 regarding the above mentioned tour for in a range of Rs.1 lac all inclusive to which Mr. Sandipta of Paras Holidays (P) Ltd. responded and shown their best work in this filed to allure the customers for the period from 01.10.2010 to 12.10.2010 and guaranteed us that this a most cost saver package and which is hassle free escorted tour with all inclusive and VISA facility also.
Examination in Chief deferred as accused is not ready with the documents to be filed in Examination in Chief.
RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Paras Holidays (P) Ltd. Vs. Ms. Roopali Aggarwal C.C.No.5765/11 10.02.2012 Present: Mr. Satish Bajaj, Ld. Counsel for the complainant company.
Accused with Advocate Sh. Rama Shanker.
One witness Ramji Lal from Karol Bagh Post Office, Delhi-110005 is present.
One witness Gyan Chand, Postman, Beat No.10, Civil Lines Post Office, Delhi-110054 is also present.
Their statements recorded separately. Discharged.
Accused Ms. Roopali Aggarwal is present. Her Examination in Chief recorded in part as she is not ready file documents. Examination in Chief is deferred.
Further Examination in Chief to be recorded on the next date.
Head Constable Satish Kumar, No.1607/C from PS: Karol Bagh is present. He has not brought any record.
A report has been received from the ACP, Karol Bagh stating that a complaint of Dr. Roopali Aggarwal was sent to HAC Branch (Central Distt.).
Let record be called from this branch.
List on 04.04.2012.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Modline Finstock Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Surender Kumar C.C.No.5940/11 10.02.2012 Present: AR of the complainant company with counsel.
Accused in person.
At request of both the parties, let the file be sent to Mediation Cell for 28.02.2012 at 02.00 p.m. Regular date of hearing is 17.03.2012.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 Arjun Kohli Vs. M/s Mehta Offset Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
C.C.No.6588/12Fresh case received by way of assignment. Let it be checked and registered.
10.02.2012 Present: Complainant with counsel.
He seeks an opportunity to advance arguments.
List on 24.02.2012.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Onkar Mal Shanker Lal Vs. M/s Vansh Traders C.C.No.6590/12 10.02.2012 Statement of Mr. Sourav Goenka, AR of the complainant firm. On S.A. I, the above named AR of the complainant firm do hereby tender my evidence by way of affidavit Exh.CW1/A which bears my signatures at Point A and Point B. I hereby close my Pre- summoning evidence.
RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Onkar Mal Shanker Lal Vs. M/s Vansh Traders C.C.No.6591/12 10.02.2012 Statement of Mr. Sourav Goenka, AR of the complainant firm. On S.A. I, the above named AR of the complainant firm do hereby tender my evidence by way of affidavit Exh.CW1/A which bears my signatures at Point A and Point B. I hereby close my Pre- summoning evidence.
RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Onkar Mal Shanker Lal Vs. M/s H.C. Taxi Service C.C.No.6589/12 10.02.2012 Statement of Mr. Sourav Goenka, AR of the complainant firm. On S.A. I, the above named AR of the complainant firm do hereby tender my evidence by way of affidavit Exh.CW1/A which bears my signatures at Point A and Point B. I hereby close my Pre- summoning evidence.
RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 Pritpal Singh Vs. M/s Denim Exim Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
C.C.No.6592/1210.02.2012 Statement of Mr. Pritpal Singh, Complainant. On S.A. I, the above named complainant do hereby tender my evidence by way of affidavit Exh.CW1/A which bears my signatures at Point A and Point B. I hereby close my Pre-summoning evidence.
RO & AC (RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 Pritpal Singh Vs. M/s Denim Exim Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
C.C.No.6592/12Fresh case received by way of assignment. Let it be checked and registered.
10.02.2012 Present: Complainant with counsel.
After going through the complaint and the affidavit of the complainant's witness and after considering the issues of limitation and jurisdiction (notice has been served upon the accused in Delhi), I am of the opinion that prima facie a case for offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is made out against the accused person.
A summons be issued against accused No.1 and 2 for the next date of hearing. Complainant shall file necessary process fee.
Summons shall also be sent through the mode of speed post and authorized courier.
Complainant shall ensure the filing of sufficient number of copies of the complaint as provided in section-204(3) Cr.PC.
Complainant to file the Process fees within 10 days.
Complainant shall keep in mind the provision of section-204(4) Cr.PC. empowering the court to dismiss the complaint in case steps as directed above are not taken within a reasonable time.
Let the matter be listed for further proceeding under summary trial procedure on 02.05.2012.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Onkar Mal Shanker Lal Vs. M/s H.C. Taxi Service C.C.No.6589/12 Fresh case received by way of assignment. Let it be checked and registered.
10.02.2012 Present: AR of the Complainant firm with counsel.
After going through the complaint and the affidavit of the complainant's witness and after considering the issues of limitation and jurisdiction, I am of the opinion that prima facie a case for offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is made out against the accused person.
A summons be issued against accused No.1 and 2 for the next date of hearing. Complainant shall file necessary process fee.
Summons shall also be sent through the mode of speed post and authorized courier.
Complainant shall ensure the filing of sufficient number of copies of the complaint as provided in section-204(3) Cr.PC.
Complainant to file the Process fees within 10 days.
Complainant shall keep in mind the provision of section-204(4) Cr.PC. empowering the court to dismiss the complaint in case steps as directed above are not taken within a reasonable time.
Let the matter be listed for further proceeding under summary trial procedure on 02.05.2012.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Onkar Mal Shanker Lal Vs. M/s Vansh Traders C.C.No.6591/12 Fresh case received by way of assignment. Let it be checked and registered.
10.02.2012 Present: AR of the Complainant firm with counsel.
After going through the complaint and the affidavit of the complainant's witness and after considering the issues of limitation and jurisdiction, I am of the opinion that prima facie a case for offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is made out against the accused person.
A summons be issued against accused Deepak Lalwani for the next date of hearing. Complainant shall file necessary process fee.
Summons shall also be sent through the mode of speed post and authorized courier.
Complainant shall ensure the filing of sufficient number of copies of the complaint as provided in section-204(3) Cr.PC.
Complainant to file the Process fees within 10 days.
Complainant shall keep in mind the provision of section-204(4) Cr.PC. empowering the court to dismiss the complaint in case steps as directed above are not taken within a reasonable time.
Let the matter be listed for further proceeding under summary trial procedure on 02.05.2012.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012 M/s Onkar Mal Shanker Lal Vs. M/s Vansh Traders C.C.No.6590/12 Fresh case received by way of assignment. Let it be checked and registered.
10.02.2012 Present: AR of the Complainant firm with counsel.
After going through the complaint and the affidavit of the complainant's witness and after considering the issues of limitation and jurisdiction, I am of the opinion that prima facie a case for offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is made out against the accused person.
A summons be issued against accused Deepak Lalwani for the next date of hearing. Complainant shall file necessary process fee.
Summons shall also be sent through the mode of speed post and authorized courier.
Complainant shall ensure the filing of sufficient number of copies of the complaint as provided in section-204(3) Cr.PC.
Complainant to file the Process fees within 10 days.
Complainant shall keep in mind the provision of section-204(4) Cr.PC. empowering the court to dismiss the complaint in case steps as directed above are not taken within a reasonable time.
Let the matter be listed for further proceeding under summary trial procedure on 02.05.2012.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi/10.02.2012