Delhi District Court
M/S Cool Home (India) vs . Sumeet Sidhu on 4 February, 2013
M/s Cool Home (India) Vs. Sumeet Sidhu
CC No.6556/12
04.02.2013
File taken up today as 03.02.2013 was Sunday.
Present: None.
A Notice be issued to the Complainant for 15.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Gopal Krishan Gupta Vs. S.L. Swami
CC No.5252/10
04.02.2013
File taken up today as 03.02.2013 was Sunday.
Present: Parties in person.
At request, be awaited.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
At 12.33 p.m.
Present: Parties with their counsels.
Expert witness Sh. Ashok Kashyap further cross-examined. Discharged.
Ld. counsel for the accused submits that he wants to examine one more witness and he
will bring the same on his own. He further submits that accused will be out of India till
25.03.2013.
In such circumstances, list the matter for 04.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Wings Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Kanchan Pharmaceuticals & Anr.
CC No.820/10
04.02.2013
File taken up today as 03.02.2013 was Sunday.
Present: None.
Notice be issued to the complainant for 16.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Sanjiv Aggarwal Vs. M/s World Class India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
CC No.5210/10
04.02.2013
File taken up today as 03.02.2013 was Sunday.
Present: None.
Notice be issued to the complainant for 17.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Gogia Plastics Vs. M/s M.B. Engineering Corporation & Ors.
CC No.5016/10
04.02.2013
Present: None.
There is no compliance of the earlier order.
Be complied with for 17.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Vikas Nagpal Vs. M/s Radiance Multitech & Ors.
CC No.3701/10 & 3713/10
04.02.2013
Present: None for the parties.
There is no compliance of the earlier order.
Be complied with for 12.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
ASP Sealing Products Ltd. Vs. M/s Amit Fabricators & Anr.
CC No.1674/10
04.02.2013
Present: None.
Last opportunity for the complainant to lead pre-summoning evidence.
List on 17.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Souvenir Publishers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Palanisamy
CC No.4745/10
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the Complainant.
Accused absent.
Be awaited.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
At 01.05 p.m.
Present: AR of the Complainant with counsel.
Accused absent.
It appears that on the last date accused had taken time to furnish surety. However, today
no one is appearing on behalf of the accused. Personal bond of the accused stands forfeited. Let a
Non Bailable Warrant be issued against the accused for 29.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Tecpro Paints Private Limited Vs. M/s Anand Auto Paints & Anr.
CC No.2660/10
04.02.2013
Present: Counsel for the Complainant.
Accused absent.
Be awaited.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
At 01.02 p.m.
Present: Both the parties with their counsels.
Arguments heard.
Ld. counsel for the accused has no objection.
Both the applications of the Complainant are allowed. New AR of the Complainant stands
substituted. Ld. counsel for the complainant submits that they had filed the Amended Memo of
the Parties with application. Let the office to indicate the file in view of Amended Memo of
Parties.
Ld. counsel for the complainant seeks time to lead evidence.
List on 10.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Bhagat Singh Vs. Shri Luxmi Agencies
CC No.1432/10
04.02.2013
Present: None.
There is no compliance of the earlier order.
Be complied with for 20.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Satnarayan Panchal Vs. Ms. Anjali
CC No.6243/11
04.02.2013
Present: None.
Be awaited.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
At 01.00 p.m.
Present: Counsel for the complainant.
Accused absent.
Let BW in the sum of Rs.10,000/- be issued against the accused for 30.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Smt. Raj Rani Vs. Babu Lal
CC No.6810/12
04.02.2013
Present: Counsel for the Complainant.
Accused with counsel.
It appears that on 27.11.2012 Plea and Examination of accused was recorded and in terms of
Step-III of Guidelines laid down in Rajesh Aggarwal Vs. State & Anr. 171 (2010) DLT-51, matter was
directed to be listed for defence evidence. However, till the adjourned date i.e. 10.01.2013 accused had not
taken any step in defence. Ld. Link MM adjourned the matter for the purpose fixed to this date. Naturally
it was for the accused to take all necessary steps for his defence sufficiently before the date of hearing.
However, the accused had not taken any steps in defence and has relied primarily upon a tactics prevalent
in the practical criminal jurisprudence i.e. to change the counsel on the date of hearing and to anticipate
one more opportunity for doing the things. I am unable to find any justification in such tactics.
If the matter is at the stage of defence evidence, any accused can lead his defence by producing
the witnesses in defence on his own or by filing list of witnesses with application for summoning of such
witnesses or by making a written request U/s 315 Cr.P.C. for his own examination as a defence witness if
so advised. Clearly the same could have been done before the fixed date of hearing. Further there is no
law which requires that if the court is conducted by Ld. Link MM, the parties are not required to take any
steps. It is also not the case of the accused that he has brought any witness to be examined in defence
today. Ld. counsel for the accused is, however, seeking one opportunity on the ground that he is fully
unaware about the factual position of the present case being engaged only today and, therefore, he is
unable to assist the court.
Considering the fact that the matter attracts criminal liability, one more opportunity is given to the
accused to take all necessary steps within five days subject to a cost of Rs.500/- to be deposited with the
Mediation Center, Tis Hazari, Delhi.
List on 04.04.2013 for defence evidence.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Mohit Gupta Vs. Amir Jahid
CC No.6246/11
04.02.2013
Present: Proxy counsel for the Complainant.
Proxy counsel for the accused.
It appears that on the last date parties had taken time for settlement. Till date, however,
settlement has not arrived at between the parties. Accused is also not present. An exemption
application filed on behalf of the accused on the ground that he is suffering from high Fever.
Complainant is, however, disputing the position with the submission that accused is out of Delhi.
It appears that no medical papers have been filed. Even no details about duration of fever has
been mentioned in the application and simply a bald averment has been made in the application.
It seems to be natural that accused is deliberate in avoiding his appearance. The exemption
application being devoid of merit is dismissed.
Ld. Proxy counsel for the accused, however, submits that accused is willing to make the
payment but the manner and mode are required to be settled and for this matter may be sent to
Mediation Cell. Since accused and ld. main counsel are not present, ld. proxy counsel is seeking
two days time to ensure the presence of the accused.
List on 07.02.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Wiley India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mukesh Jain
CC No.6895/12
04.02.2013
Present: None.
There is no compliance of the earlier order.
Be complied with for 21.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Devender Kumar Singh Vs. Smt. Neena Sharma
CC No.4718/10
04.02.2013
Present: None.
Process be awaited.
Previous order be complied with 02.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Bharat Bhushan Tuli Vs. M/s Radiance Multitech & Ors.
CC No.4326/1/04
04.02.2013
Present: None.
Process Server be called for 09.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Excel Enterprises Vs. M/s Highland House Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
CC No.1994/10 & 1995/10
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the complainant.
Accused No.4 and 5 with counsel.
These are two connected matters.
Ld. counsel for the accused submits that they have received necessary documents from
the Complainant.
It appears that office has not issued Notice to the Process Server.
Let the Process Server be called in respect of accused No.2.
A report be called from Registrar of Companies in respect of the accused company in
terms of order dated 01.11.2012 as the same has not been complied by the office till date. An
explanation be called from the Ahlmad for the non compliance of the order.
List on 12.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s J.S.S. Cargo Vs. Parveen Grover
CC No.6138/11
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the complainant.
Accused absent.
Ahlmad to report about compliance of last order.
The same may be complied with afresh for 18.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Empire Home Appliances Ltd. Vs. M/s Ashoka Electronics
CC No.2000/10
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the complainant.
Accused absent.
Ahlmad to report about compliance of last order.
The same may be complied with afresh for 18.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Ketan Sales Vs. M/s A-Z Enterprises & Anr.
CC No.3670/10
04.02.2013
Present: Proxy counsel for the Complainant.
An exemption application filed on behalf of the complainant on the ground that he is out
of station. Earlier summons still not received back. Be awaited.
It is further no compliance of the last order.
Previous order be complied with for 30.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Everest Blowers Vs. M/s Neel Water Treatment Systems Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
CC No.6720/12
04.02.2013
Present: Counsel for the Complainant.
This is unfortunate that till date orders have not been complied with. Whereas ld. counsel
submits that they have already filed necessary process fee.
Last opportunity is given to the office to properly issue the processes and indicate also the
return of the processes in all the cases failing which the court would be constraint to take
appropriate action against the defaulting staff members.
Summons be issued afresh for 21.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Om Dutt Kaushik Vs. M/s Global Infocom Ltd. & Anr.
CC No.4665/10
04.02.2013
Present: Complainant with counsel.
Accused absent.
Ct. Praveen Gautam is present and submits that he was out of station on earlier occasion,
therefore, he could not appear. He has to file his written explanation.
Warrant of Attachment against Sureties Rakesh Kasana and Vipin Jain is unexecuted with
a report wrong address. It appears that the Sureties Rakesh Kasana and Vipin Jain had executed
the bond on 16.10.2010 before the Police official in execution of BW against the accused. Now
the police authorities are saying that the addresses of Surety are wrong.
Let the concerned SHO be called.
NBW against the accused is unexecuted.
It appears that an application for issuance of Production Warrant against accused Vipin
Jain is on record which was moved by some Advocate Satender Kumar Sharma. It seems that in
the present case Vipin Kumar Jain is not accused. The application is, therefore, dismissed. It has,
however, been brought to the notice that Vipin Jain is an accused in some other case which is
listed for 14.02.2012 in this court. It appears that one Vipin Jain is Surety in the present case.
Let this file be listed on 14.02.2013.
Ct. Praveen Gautam is bound down for the next date.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
D.P. Khandelwal Vs. M/s Krish Sales & Ors.
CC No.1912/10
04.02.2013
File is taken up today since 03.02.2013 was Sunday.
Present: Counsel for the Complainant.
Accused absent.
Ld. counsel submits that accused is very much residing at the given address.
I consider that this is not appropriate. On similar submissions, Complainant was given an
opportunity to assist the process Server on earlier occasion but the Complainant never made any
effort to assist the Process Server and thereafter a direction was made that summons would only
be issued upon filing of fresh address of the accused. Ld. counsel for the complainant is,
however, making the similar submissions. He is, however, seeking one more opportunity to
comply with the orders. Last opportunity to comply with the earlier order.
List on 27.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Oct Data Systems (P) Ltd. Vs. M/s Om Krishna Tele Services Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
CC No.6721/12
04.02.2013
Present: Ld. counsel for the Complainant.
Ahlmad to report about compliance of last order.
The same may be complied with afresh for 21.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Ajay Jain Vs. Faquir Chand
CC No.6629/12
04.02.2013
File is taken up today since 03.02.2013 was Sunday.
Present: Ld. counsel for the Complainant.
Ahlmad to report about compliance of last order.
The same may be complied with afresh for 20.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s AVCO Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sunny
CC No.6451/11
04.02.2013
File is taken up today since 03.02.2013 was Sunday.
Present: Ld. counsel for the Complainant.
Ahlmad to report about compliance of last order.
The same may be complied with afresh for 21.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Brawn Biotech Ltd. Vs. Prashant Kumar
CC No.6571/12
04.02.2013
File is taken up today since 03.02.2013 was Sunday.
Present: Ld. counsel for the Complainant.
Ahlmad to report about compliance of last order.
The same may be complied with afresh for 20.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
B.K. International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pradipta
CC No.6067/11
04.02.2013
Present: Ld. counsel for the Complainant.
Ahlmad to report about compliance of last order.
The same may be complied with afresh for 20.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Brawn Biotech Ltd. Vs. Prashant Kumar
CC No.6570/12
04.02.2013
File is taken up today since 03.02.2013 was Sunday.
Present: Ld. counsel for the Complainant.
Ahlmad to report about compliance of last order.
The same may be complied with afresh for 20.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Rakesh Traders Vs. M/s Gold Gift Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.
CC No.100/10
04.02.2013
Present: None for the Complainant.
Advocate Sh. Manish Sharma on behalf of the accused.
Earlier Notice to the Complainant still not received back. There is further no compliance
of the last order. Let Notice be issued again to the Complainant.
It appears that accused is also not appearing despite the execution of Process U/s 82
Cr.P.C. Till date ld. counsel has not filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the accused whereas on the
last date some other counsel was available. Clearly accused is deliberately avoiding his
appearance in the court. Conduct of the accused does not deserve any leniency. NBW to be
issued against the accused at the earliest to be executable by the concerned SHO. Notice to
Complainant be also served by the concerned SHO.
List on 02.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Unique Footwear Vs. M/s Makson Retailers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
CC No.4984/10, 4985/10 & 4986/10
04.02.2013
Present: None.
These are three connected matters.
There is no compliance of the earlier order.
Be complied with afresh for 08.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Alliance Mediequip Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ms. Somya Kapoor
CC No.6503/12
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the Complainant.
Accused with counsel.
Ld. counsel for the accused submits that accused has deposited the cost of Rs.3,000/- with
the Mediation Center, Tis Hazari, Delhi and has filed receipt thereof. Accused is admitted on bail
subject to furnishing of Bail bond and Surety bond to the tune of Rs.1 lac. Accused furnished the
same. Accepted subject to furnishing of remaining solvency of the Surety.
Ld. Counsel for the accused submits that without prejudice to the rights and contention of
the accused, accused is ready to settle the matter for Rs.12,50,000/- in installments. AR of the
Complainant is seeking an adjournment on the ground that his counsel is busy in Hon'ble High
Court.
List on 08.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Ravinder Pal Singh Vs. Meenakshi Marwah
CC No.2531/10, 2551/10 & 2557/10
04.02.2013
Present: Parties in person.
These are three connected matters and Parcha Yaddasts have been placed as the files are
before the Ld. Revisional Court. Parties submit that the date therein is 25.02.2013.
Let the files be awaited and list on 19.03.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Vinod Kumar Vs. Mahesh
CC No.1285/10
04.02.2013
Present: None.
Earlier Notice be awaited.
There is no compliance of the last order.
Be complied with afresh for 17.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Nachiin Travel Service Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Melwyn Williams
CC No.7052/12, 7053/12 & 7054/12
04.02.2013
Statement of Mr. Sandeep Goswami, Director and AR of the Complainant.
On S.A.
I, the above named Director and AR of the Complainant do hereby state on the behalf of
the Complainant that the matter has been amicably settled with the accused in full and final
settlement in the present complaint case. Accused has given the entire settled amount to the
complainant in the present complaint case. Complainant has no further grievance against the
accused as nothing remains due towards the accused in the present complaint case. 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
04.02.2013
M/s Nachiin Travel Service Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Melwyn Williams
CC No.7052/12, 7053/12 & 7054/12
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the Complainant with counsel.
These are three connected matters. The matter settled. Separate statement of AR recorded
in this respect. The matter stands compounded U/s 147 NI Act. Accused is acquitted of the
charges. File be consigned to Record Room.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Vision Plus Security Control (P) Ltd. Vs. Deepak
CC No.6587/12
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the complainant with counsel.
Earlier process still not received back. There is further no compliance of the last order.
Be complied with afresh for 22.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Ram Kanwar Antal Vs. Anil Kumar
CC No.5468/11
04.02.2013
Present: Parties with their counsels.
Ld. counsel for the complainant submits that he will inspect the file as per rule and will
assist the court. It appears that office has not issued necessary notice for compliance of the order
dated 10.07.2012 despite specific direction given on the last date. Let the same be complied with
for 01.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Kameshwari Tiwari Vs. Om Prakash Tripathi
CC No.1675/10
04.02.2013
Present: Complainant with counsel.
Mr. Sanjay Arora, Branch Manager with counsel Ms. Shalini Upadhyay is present.
Till date bank has not been able to trace the relevant record. Even today ld. counsel for the
bank submits that till date bank has not been able to trace the record. It appears that vide order
dated 03.12.2012 an explanation was directed to be called from the Zonal Head of the SBI,
however, till date office has not complied with the order. Ld. counsel for the bank submits that
the Chief Manager of the Branch is contemplating an inquiry to be conducted in respect of the
registers pertaining to the relevant period and he will file a report in this respect.
At request of ld. counsel time is given to the Chief Manager to file complete report in this
respect.
List on 17.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
04.02.2013
At this stage, ld. Cl. For the bank submitted that the inquiry will be conducted by the Regional
Manager. As prayed, let the same be conducted by the Regional Manager. List on date fixed i.e.
17/04/2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Fablas Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Hemant Sharma
CC No.6539/A/12
04.02.2013
Present: Applicant with counsel.
Counsel for Complainant/Respondent.
Applicant has filed his affidavit stating that civil suit complainant has been dismissed.
Ld. counsel for the complainant/respondent submits that they have filed an appeal.
At joint request, adjourned to 10.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 M/s Vanshika Shipping & Logistic Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Two Way Container Lines Pvt. Ltd.&Ors.
CC No.6938/12
04.02.2013
Present: Counsel for the Complainant.
Counsel for accused No.4.
An exemption application has been filed on behalf accused No.4 on the ground that he has to attend an urgent Board Meeting. It appears that even on the last date exemption application filed on behalf accused No.4. I am not inclined to accept repeated exemption applications. No person has any right to avoid court proceedings for their business work. The application is dismissed.
A Bailable Warrant in the sum of Rs.50,000/- against accused No.4 be issued. Other accused persons are still not served. Explanation be called from the Ahlmad.
Let all the other accused persons be also served by way of summons.
List on 15.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 HPL Electric & Power Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Shree Agencies & Ors.
CC No.6241/1104.02.2013 Statement of Mr. Vijay Prakash, Ld. Counsel for the Complainant. Without oath.
I, the above named counsel for the Complainant do hereby state on the behalf of the Complainant that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties in full and final settlement in the present complaint case. Accused has given the entire settled amount to the complainant in the present complaint case. Complainant has no further grievance against the accused as nothing remains due towards the accused in the present complaint case. 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 04.02.2013 HPL Electric & Power Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Shree Agencies & Ors.
CC No.6241/1104.02.2013 Present: Mr. Suraj, Employee of the Complainant with Counsel.
The matter settled. Separate statement of ld. counsel recorded in this respect. The matter stands compounded U/s 147 NI Act. Accused is acquitted of the charges. File be consigned to Record Room.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Golden Stationary Vs. Goel Papers
CC No.5706/10
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the complainant.
Accused with counsel.
This is a Parcha Yaddast as the file is before the Ld. Revisional Court and the parties submit that the date therein is 23.02.2013.
Let the file be awaited for 09.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 M/s Bindal Techno Polymer Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Vin Oxide Industries CC No.6027/11 04.02.2013 Present: None.
There is no compliance of the last order.
Be complied with for 17.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s K.S. Auto Sales Vs. Subodh Kumar
CC No.769/10
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the Complainant with counsel.
NBW issued against the accused for the last has not been received till date. An explanation be called from the concerned SHO. It appears that there is no compliance of the last order. Let the same be complied with. Notice to Surety be also issued for 17.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 Roopshree Creations Vs. Niranjan Kumar CC No.5204/10, 5211/10, 5222/10, 5224/10 & 5225/10 04.02.2013 Present: Counsel for the Complainant.
Accused with counsel.
It appears that ld. counsel for the accused has filed his Vakalatnama alongwith an application for adjournment.
These are five connected matters. However, four files have been placed alongwith a Parcha Yaddast in respect of the fifth file bearing CC No.5224/10. Ahlmad from the Ld. Revisional Court is present and is seeking a passover to file a report about the status of this file.
Be awaited.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 After lunch time.
Present: Counsel for the Complainant.
Accused with counsel.
Ahlmad of the concerned Ld. Revisional Court is also present and has filed his reply stating that he had not received any TCR in this case. He further submits that copy of orders in all the five cases were duly sent to this court which was received by one employee of this court. It seems that no such orders are available on file.
The Ahlmad of this court shall make a comprehensive report about the file bearing CC No.5224/10 for which Parcha Yaddast has been placed.
Ld. Counsel for the accused submits that they have filed a Revision Petition and Ld. Revisional Court has issued a direction not to hear the final arguments and not to pronounce any judgment till further orders. Ld. counsel also submits that the date in Ld. Revisional Court is 20.02.2013.
Let further orders be awaited. Status of the file bearing CC No.5224/10 be also clarified by the office.
List on 02.03.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Satpal Garg Vs. Ms. Veena Kohli
CC No.3437/10
04.02.2013
Present: Complainant with counsel.
Accused absent.
Be awaited.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
At 04.00 p.m.
Present: Parties with their counsels.
Complainant further cross-examined in pre and post lunch session. Cross-examination deferred.
List on 08.03.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Surendra Vs. Pawan
CC No.6792/12
04.02.2013
Present: None for the Complainant.
Accused with counsel.
Accused is admitted on bail subject to furnishing of bail bond and surety bond to the tune of Rs.5,000/-. Furnished the same. Accepted.
Ld. counsel further seeks some more time to deposit the cost on the ground that Mediation Center, Tis Hazari, Delhi has not provided him the details where the cost can be deposited.
Let a Notice be also issued to the Complainant.
List on 13.04.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Kritender Sharma Vs. Shashi Khanna
CC No.4182/10
04.02.2013
Present: Both the parties with their counsels.
Witness Sandeep Jain from Income Tax office examined and discharged.
Ld. counsel for the complainant, however, submits that the witness has not brought the record for the year 2007-2010 on the ground of jurisdiction. He submits that he will file necessary application to summon the witness from the concerned Income Tax office. Other witnesses unserved. Let them to be served.
List on 22.04.2013 at request of both the sides.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 M/s Bharat Insecticides Ltd. Vs. Smt. S. Nagi Reddy CC No.6772/12 04.02.2013 Statement of Mr. Mohan Chander, AR of the Complainant. On S.A. I, the above named AR of the Complainant do hereby state on the behalf of the Complainant that the matter has been amicably settled with the accused in full and final settlement in the present complaint case. Accused has given the entire settled amount to the complainant in the present complaint case. Complainant has no further grievance against the accused as nothing remains due towards the accused in the present complaint case. 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 04.02.2013 M/s Bharat Insecticides Ltd. Vs. Rakesh Kumar CC No.5570/11 04.02.2013 Statement of Mr. Mohan Chander, AR of the Complainant. On S.A. I, the above named AR of the Complainant do hereby state on the behalf of the Complainant that the matter has been amicably settled with the accused in full and final settlement in the present complaint case. Accused has given the entire settled amount to the complainant in the present complaint case. Complainant has no further grievance against the accused as nothing remains due towards the accused in the present complaint case. 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 04.02.2013 M/s Bharat Insecticides Ltd. Vs. Rakesh Kumar CC No.5570/11 04.02.2013 File taken up on an application moved on behalf of the complainant for withdrawal of the case.
Present: AR of the Complainant.
The matter settled. Separate statement of AR recorded in this respect. The matter stands compounded U/s 147 NI Act. Accused is acquitted of the charges. Earlier date stands cancelled. File be consigned to Record Room.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 M/s Bharat Insecticides Ltd. Vs. Smt. S. Nagi Reddy CC No.6772/12 04.02.2013 File taken up on an application moved on behalf of the complainant for withdrawal of the case.
Present: AR of the Complainant.
The matter settled. Separate statement of AR recorded in this respect. The matter stands compounded U/s 147 NI Act. Accused is acquitted of the charges. Earlier date stands cancelled. File be consigned to Record Room.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 M/s Swift Shipping & Freight Logistics (P) Ltd. Vs. M/s Ridley Impex Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
CC No.7242/1304.02.2013 Fresh case received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered.
Present: Proxy counsel for the Complainant.
At request, adjourned to 21.02.2013 for consideration.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Kiran Kwatra Vs. Mohit Kumar Wadhwa
CC No.6382/11
04.02.2013
File taken up on an application moved on behalf of the accused for permanent exemption.
File taken up today since 03.02.2013 was Sunday.
Present: Counsel for the accused.
The application has been filed taking the ground that accused is expected to remain out of station for business tour and that he mostly remains out of station, therefore, permanent exemption may be granted. It further appears that prayer has also been made for regular bail. I consider that if accused is not present, there cannot be any question of bail. Further the ground taken for permanent exemption is completely frivolous. If we allow such type of application then every accused will seek permanent exemption on the ground that he is busy in his business. Moreover the present case is showing all deliberate attempts on the part of the accused. It appears that on 23.01.2013, NBW was cancelled upon an application moved on behalf of the accused whereupon ld. counsel for the accused had made a submission to ensure the presence of the accused on the date fixed i.e. 07.02.2013. However, before the fixed date of 07.02.2013, ld. counsel for the accused chose to file the instant application seeking permanent exemption. I am primarily unable to find any justification to allow this application in view of the conduct of the accused in avoiding his appearance in the court on one pretext or the other. The application is dismissed. However, since vide order dated 23.01.2013, opportunity has been given to the accused to put his appearance on the date fixed, let the opportunity to continue till such date i.e. the date already fixed.
List on the date fixed i.e. 07.02.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 M/s Microgene Diagnostic Systems (P) Ltd. Vs. M. Karthik CC No.7134/13 04.02.2013 Present: AR of the Complainant with counsel.
This court has passed a detailed order on 16.05.2012 in a case titled as Harish Chand Vs. Saira Khatoon, CC No.6687/12 whereby it was observed that there is no necessity to tender the affidavit and that exhibits mentioned in the affidavit are to be marked, initialed and dated by the authority before whom affidavit has been sworn.
AR has filed his affidavit in evidence alongwith documents exhibited by the Oath Commissioner. The affidavit is marked as Mark-R for the purpose of identification.
I have gone through the record and after hearing the ld. counsel, I am satisfied that a case U/s 138 NI has been made out against the accused. Let the accused be summoned through all available modes for 30.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
M/s Dampseal Vs. Jagdish Raj Pal
CC No.7113/12
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the Complainant with counsel.
This court has passed a detailed order on 16.05.2012 in a case titled as Harish Chand Vs. Saira Khatoon, CC No.6687/12 whereby it was observed that there is no necessity to tender the affidavit and that exhibits mentioned in the affidavit are to be marked, initialed and dated by the authority before whom affidavit has been sworn.
AR has filed his affidavit in evidence alongwith documents exhibited by the Oath Commissioner. The affidavit is marked as Mark-R for the purpose of identification.
I have gone through the record and after hearing the ld. counsel, I am satisfied that a case U/s 138 NI has been made out against the accused. Let the accused be summoned through all available modes for 30.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Smt. Shashi Kapoor Vs. Mohinder Bhola
CC No.581/10
04.02.2013
File taken up on an application for cancellation/stay of NBW for one month.
Present: Ld. counsel for the convict.
It appears that NBW issued against the convict has been unexecuted. It further appears that there was no further direction for issuance of Warrant of Attachment but the office issued the same and the same has also been unexecuted. Ahlmad shall explain the reason for issuing the Warrant of Attachment in the absence of any direction.
It appears that the regular date is fixed as 05.02.2013.
Let the file be listed on 05.02.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 M/s N.K. Overseas Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Bobby Hosiery & Anr.
CC No.7114/1204.02.2013 Present: AR of the Complainant with counsel.
This court has passed a detailed order on 16.05.2012 in a case titled as Harish Chand Vs. Saira Khatoon, CC No.6687/12 whereby it was observed that there is no necessity to tender the affidavit and that exhibits mentioned in the affidavit are to be marked, initialed and dated by the authority before whom affidavit has been sworn.
AR has filed his affidavit in evidence alongwith documents exhibited by the Oath Commissioner. The affidavit is marked as Mark-R for the purpose of identification.
I have gone through the record and after hearing the ld. counsel, I am satisfied that a case U/s 138 NI has been made out against the accused. Let the accused No.2 be summoned through all available modes for 29.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Upinder Singh Vs. Anil Mehta
CC No.6774/12
04.02.2013
Present: Complainant with counsel.
This court has passed a detailed order on 16.05.2012 in a case titled as Harish Chand Vs. Saira Khatoon, CC No.6687/12 whereby it was observed that there is no necessity to tender the affidavit and that exhibits mentioned in the affidavit are to be marked, initialed and dated by the authority before whom affidavit has been sworn.
Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence alongwith documents exhibited by the Oath Commissioner. The affidavit is marked as Mark-R for the purpose of identification.
I have gone through the record and after hearing the ld. counsel, I am satisfied that a case U/s 138 NI has been made out against the accused. Let the accused Anil Mehta be summoned through all available modes for 28.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Rajinder Kumar Vs. Manoj Kumar Bisoi
CC No.4156/10
04.02.2013
Present: Complainant with counsel.
This court has passed a detailed order on 16.05.2012 in a case titled as Harish Chand Vs. Saira Khatoon, CC No.6687/12 whereby it was observed that there is no necessity to tender the affidavit and that exhibits mentioned in the affidavit are to be marked, initialed and dated by the authority before whom affidavit has been sworn.
Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence alongwith documents exhibited by the Oath Commissioner. The affidavit is marked as Mark-R for the purpose of identification.
I have gone through the record and after hearing the ld. counsel, I am satisfied that a case U/s 138 NI has been made out against the accused. Let the accused Manoj Kumar Bisoi be summoned through all available modes for 30.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH)
MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi
04.02.2013
Rajinder Kumar Vs. A.T. Rafiq
CC No.4177/10
04.02.2013
Present: Complainant with counsel.
This court has passed a detailed order on 16.05.2012 in a case titled as Harish Chand Vs. Saira Khatoon, CC No.6687/12 whereby it was observed that there is no necessity to tender the affidavit and that exhibits mentioned in the affidavit are to be marked, initialed and dated by the authority before whom affidavit has been sworn.
Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence alongwith documents exhibited by the Oath Commissioner. The affidavit is marked as Mark-R for the purpose of identification.
I have gone through the record and after hearing the ld. counsel, I am satisfied that a case U/s 138 NI has been made out against the accused. Let the accused A.T. Rafiq be summoned through all available modes for 30.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 Yogesh Trading Company Vs. Balaji Foundaries Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
CC No.6734/A/12 & 6814/12 04.02.2013 Present: AR of the Complainant with counsel.
This court has passed a detailed order on 16.05.2012 in a case titled as Harish Chand Vs. Saira Khatoon, CC No.6687/12 whereby it was observed that there is no necessity to tender the affidavit and that exhibits mentioned in the affidavit are to be marked, initialed and dated by the authority before whom affidavit has been sworn.
AR has filed his affidavit in evidence alongwith documents exhibited by the Oath Commissioner. The affidavit is marked as Mark-R for the purpose of identification.
I have gone through the record and after hearing the ld. counsel, I am satisfied that a case U/s 138 NI has been made out against the accused. Let the accused Vipin Jaiprakash Agarwal be summoned through all available modes for 20.05.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 Dhani Ram Bansal Vs. M/s Ambassy Contractor Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
CC No.7243/1304.02.2013 Fresh case received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered.
Present: Complainant with counsel.
This court has passed a detailed order on 16.05.2012 in a case titled as Harish Chand Vs. Saira Khatoon, CC No.6687/12 whereby it was observed that there is no necessity to tender the affidavit and that exhibits mentioned in the affidavit are to be marked, initialed and dated by the authority before whom affidavit has been sworn.
Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence alongwith documents exhibited by the Oath Commissioner. The affidavit is marked as Mark-R for the purpose of identification.
Ld. counsel for the Complainant seeks time to file some more documents and advance arguments.
List on 04.03.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013 M/s Vijaypower Generators Ltd. Vs. M/s Rishabh Engineering Co. & Anr.
CC No.1007/10
04.02.2013
Present: AR of the complainant.
Accused absent.
It is 04.02 p.m. Matter is listed for pronouncement of judgment. However, no one is appearing on behalf of the accused despite several calls.
Let NBW be issued against the accused alongwith a Notice to Surety for 21.02.2013.
(RAKESH KUMAR SINGH) MM-(NI Act)-Central-01/THC/Delhi 04.02.2013