CAMPUS LAW CENTER,

UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

Internship
Diary
Prepared for LB-501
Moot Court, Mock Trial & Internship

PREPARED BY
SMRITI MISHRA
EXAM ROLL NO: 20309806749
CLASS ROLL NO: 201781
SECTION A

SUBMITTED TO

MS. SNEH YADAV

 RAJIV RANJAN PRASAD
ADVOCATE & LEGAL CONSULTANT
Ch.No.475, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi-110001

Date: 17.10.2022

TOWHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN

Ms. Smriti Mishra, a third year student of LLB at Campus Law Center, Faculty
of Law, Delhi University pursued her internship at our office from 05.09.2022
till 15.10.2022.

During her internship, Ms. Smriti had an

opportunity to work on some
interesting cases and had an occasion to deal with various
legal issues. She
helped in drafting of various pleadings and helped
prepare briefs for various
matters listed before Hon'ble
High Court of Delhi, District Courts at Patiala
House, Saket, Tis Hazari, and National, State and District
Consumer Redressal
Forums and appeared along with me and my team before the Hon'ble courts
I found her performance and quality
of work to be of very
good standard. I am
impressed by her ability to work hard and her research skills. She has a keen
legal mind and potential to be a good lawyer.
I wish her all the success for the
future. ANJAN P

NeW CULTTS

Rajiv Ranjan Prasad

Advocate
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sno. Particulars Page number

1. Internship Certificate

2. Acknowledgements 2
3. Introduction 3
4. Day wise summaries 4-34
5. Legal Documents drafted during the internship 35
5a. Application on behalf of the plaintiff under ORDER 36
VI RULE 17 of the CPC seeking amendment of
plaint

5b. Application on behalf of the defendant under order 43

ix rule 7 c.p.c. for setting aside the impugned order

5c. Suit under order xxxvii of the code of civil 50

procedure, 1908 for the recovery of a sum of rs.
6,90,000/- along with pendente lite and future
interest @ 12% p.a.

5d. Cease and desist notice –infringment of trademark 59

of registered mark

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This diary is a cumulative effort of the past few months and I’ve taken help from numerous
seniors, friends, and well-wishers who had extended their kindness, thoughtful words and
care towards me and my work, which deserves recognition and appreciation.

I am grateful to Shri Rajiv Ranjan Prasad Sir for providing me the opportunity to work under
him, for taking me to courts and tribunals and for helping me develop confidence and most
importantly, a voice. I’m personally grateful for the weekly sessions on reflections, which
enabled me to change my perspective and start thinking of mistakes as an opportunity to learn
and grow.

I am also grateful to Shri Lokesh Mishra, for all his novel methods of teaching and for always
keeping me on my toes. For the entire duration of internship, thanks to him, I had always
been prepared to answer questions. “Know your facts like the back of your hand”, the advice
surely helped me, even in my moot practicals.

I extend a sincere thanks to other seniors at the Vidhigyam Office, especially Shri Utkarsh
Singh Sisodia for teaching me practical skills related to Intellectual Property Rights,
including searching the registry, filing trademarks, drafting an objection, etc.

Last but not the least, I thank my dear professor at CLC, Ms. Sneh Yadav for her wonderful
teaching not just this semester, but also for a subject like Cr.PC. Her special focus on soft
skills and her live demonstrations in class were lessons I put to full use during the course of
my internship.

2
 INTRODUCTION

I had interned with Vidhigyam Advocates and Solicitors for a little over 3 months, however,
for the purposes of brevity in this diary, an account of 30 days has been recorded.

Vidhigyam is a full service law firm that deals with a range of fields, though the focus
primarily is on Civil Cases and Consumer Cases. Additionally, it handles matters related to
Criminal Cases, Negotiable Instruments Act, and Intellectual Property Rights, especially
trademarks, matters related to real estate and RERA, etc.

Vidhigyam is also empanelled with Northern Railways. The Partner Sh. Rajiv Ranjan Prasad
is also empanelled on the family courts panel for DLSA where he gives free legal aid as well.

The firm has its primary office at Sector 15A, Noida and also a chamber at Patiala House
Courts, New Delhi.

The firm has practice in all courts and tribunals of Delhi-NCR, including the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, NCDRC, SCDRC, NCLT,
NCLAT.

3
DAY WISE SUMMARIES

4
DATE: 05.09.22

DAY: Monday, Day 1

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED:

 During the first day of the internship, I was briefed about my roles and responsibilities
for the upcoming month.

These included but were not limited to research work, preparing case briefs, basic drafting,
court visits, filing trademarks, updating case files with latest orders, reading 2 additional case
files and briefing my senior about any new judgment that I may find interesting.

 For the first day I was taught how to make case briefs according to requirements of
the office.

I made a case brief of a judgement by the NCLAT the gist of which is reproduced below:

HYLINE MEDICONZ PVT LTD VS ANANDALOKE MEDICAL CENTER PVT LTD

Appeal before NCLAT against dismissal of application filed u/s 9 IBC on the ground that
claim does not meet requisite threshold to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution
Proceedings:

1. Default committed prior to 24/03/20 and demand notice served u/s 8 prior to 24/03/20
are not a determinative factor, although are condition precedent for application u/s 9
2. Section 6 specifies default is a condition precedent. Part II becomes applicable only
when threshold of default exceed 1 crore rupees wef 24.03.20

PROVISION/JUDGMENT OF THE DAY:

Anwar Hassan Khan vs Mohd Shafi & Ors (AIR 2001 SC 2984)

SC held that “for interpreting a particular provision of the Act, the import and effect of
meaning of the words and phrases used in statute has to be gathered from the text”

REFLECTIONS:

The first day itself I learnt that the key to succeed in litigation is persistence, more than
anything else.

There is a lot of inter-linkage and a ratio regarding interpretation of statutes could easily be
used anywhere and everywhere, including for the Insolvency and Bankruptcy code cases
and/or appeals.

5
DATE: 06.09.22

DAY: Tuesday, Day 2

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED:

I drafted a police complaint for presentation to the SHO under Section 415 (Cheating),
420(Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of Indian Penal Code and
Section 66 (Computer related offences) of Information Technology Act.

The complainant was cheated of Rs 34,000 through an internet scam through misleading
advertisements on social media website Facebook. The said complaint was presented to SHO,
PS Hauz Khas.

I also updated orders in the assigned files through ecourts mobile application and Confonet
website for Consumer matters.

PROVISION/JUDGEMENT OF THE DAY:

I was also given the following case law to read wider into Section 415

Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma vs State of Bihar 2000 SCC Online SC 636

Ratio relevant: “… it has to be kept in mind the distinction between mere breach of contract
and the offence of cheating is a fine one. It depends on the intention of the accused at the time
of inducement which may be judged by his subsequent conduct but for this subsequent
conduct it is not the sole test. Mere breach of contract cannot give rise to criminal
prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the
beginning of transaction that is at the time when offence is said to have been committed.
Therefore it is the intention which is the gist of the offence”

REFLECTIONS

Even while drafting a simple police complaint, a lawyer keeps in mind the law so as to put
relevant points across to make for a stronger case in favour of his client. That the complaint
forms the basis of First Information Report which is of material consequence later on in the
trial is an additional reason why it must be carefully drafted outlining relevant points.

6
DATE: 07.09.22

DAY: Wednesday, Day 3

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED:

Was asked to read through the bare act of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and summarise
proceedings under NI Act, which I learnt as follows:

Return of Cheque legal notice u/s 138 to be sent within 30 days  if no payment within 15
days of receipt of notice  filing of complaint within 30 days of expiry of notice period.

Drafted notice under section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on behalf of complainant
Gulshan Finance for return of cheque to the tune of Rs. 1,25,698 by the accused.

PROVISION/ JUDGEMENT OF THE DAY

In Re : Expeditious Trial of Cases Under Section 138 of N.I. Act 1881.(Suo Motu Writ
Petition (Crl.) No. 2 of 2020)

An important observation made in this case was reiteration of certain legal principles:
“Conferring power on the court by reading certain words into provisions is impermissible. A
judge must not rewrite a statute, neither to enlarge nor to contract it. Whatever temptations
the statesmanship of policy-making might wisely suggest, construction must eschew
interpolation and evisceration. He must not read in by way of creation. The Judge's duty is to
interpret and apply the law, not to change it to meet the Judge's idea of what justice requires.
The court cannot add words to a statute or read words into it which are not there”

REFLECTIONS

The NI Act was enacted to ensure speedy trial in payment disputes involving a promissory
note. The proceedings under NI Act are quasi criminal in nature and primarily governed by
Cr.PC. However, the trial is either a summary or summons trial.

7
DATE: 09.09.22

DAY: Friday, Day 4

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

Was asked to draft a superdari application for release of vehicle during the pendency of trial.
The day involved researching and learning about legal provisions regarding superdari and
thereafter drafting the said application.

The application contained details like name & details of the vehicle owner, registeration
number of the vehicle, FIR number, Sections under which vehicle was impounded, and name
of police station.

Filed under: Section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure

Order for custody and disposal of property pending trial in certain cases. When any property
is produced before any Criminal Court during any inquiry or trial, the Court may make such
order as it thinks fit for the proper custody of such property pending the conclusion of the
inquiry or trial, and, if the property is subject to speedy and natural decay, or if it is otherwise
expedient so to do, the Court may, after recording such evidence as it thinks necessary, order
it to be sold or otherwise disposed of.

PROVISION/JUDGEMENT OF THE DAY

Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs State Of Gujarat

“In our view, the powers under Section 451 Cr.P.C. should be exercised expeditiously and
judiciously. It would serve various purposes, namely:-

1. Owner of the article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its
misappropriation.

2. Court or the police would not be required to keep the article in safe custody;

3. If the proper panchanama before handing over possession of article is prepared, that can be
used in evidence instead of its production before the Court during the trial.”

REFLECTIONS

Superdari applications regularly put in before courts. However, it is noteworthy that many
lawyers do not know the exact provision governing superdari. It was a refreshing experience
to learn the law behind a simple routine legal process and how it can be of consequence.

8
DATE: 12.09.22

DAY: Monday, Day 5

PLACE: TIS HAZARI COURTS COMPLEX

TASK ASSIGNED

Visited Family court (Court of Additional Principal Family Judge) at Tis Hazari with seniors
and observed proceedings in the following case:

Manjit Singh Puri versus Rupinder Kaur

The respondent in the present case had filed a guardianship petition under Sections 7,9, 10
and 25 of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.

An Application filed on behalf of petitioner seeking interim relief to meet his minor children
on occasion of Diwali was put up for hearing on the instant date.

Notice was issued.

JUDGMENT OF THE DAY

Delhi High Court: Harsha Tipirneni Vs. Pooja Tipirneni, 2021 (1) ALT1,

"A parent cannot be a guest in the life of the child. If visitation rights only are granted for
limited hours, it may not be sufficient for the child to have comfortable time with the father
or mother, whoever may be the case. The wider the gap, the bonds get broken quicker and the
child is left confused and ends up believing this. Such acts of any parent in separating a child
from the other parent should be nipped in the bud otherwise the separated parent ends up
becoming a guest in the life of the child. Overnight custody must been encouraged wherever
possible and mere meeting and spending time with the parent for a couple of hours in court
premises, hotel, theatre, Mall, part, etc under the supervision of other parent or relative will
not serve any purpose of visitation”

REFLECTIONS

The experience of visiting a family court is always surprising. The court room appears full of
mixed emotions, sometimes, outbursts where a person would be left wondering on what he
saw during the proceedings. I learnt today why lawyers are taught to be objective- emotions
cloud our sense of judgment.

9
DATE: 13.09.22

DAY: Tuesday, Day 6

PLACE: TIS HAZARI COURTS COMPLEX

TASK ASSIGNED

Visited Court of Principal Family Judge, THC with seniors and observed proceedings in the
following case:

Priyanka Sharma versus Anuj Sharma

The instant case was a divorce matter through mutual consent under Section 13 B of Hindu
Marriage Act. First motion had been granted.

On this hearing, following a settlement the petitioner had agreed to withdraw all cases
(including a complaint under the Domestic Violence Act) against the respondent.

JUDGEMENT OF THE DAY

Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur AIR 2017 SC 4417

“…where the court dealing with a matter is satisfied that a case is made out to wave statutory
period under Section 13 B (2), it can do so after considering the following:

i) the statutory period of six months specified in Section 13B(2), in addition to the statutory
period of one year under Section 13B(1) of separation of parties is already over before the
first motion itself;
ii) all efforts for mediation/conciliation including efforts in terms of Order XXXIIA Rule 3
CPC/Section 23(2) of the Act/Section 9 of the Family Courts Act to reunite the parties have
failed and there is no likelihood of success in that direction by any further efforts;
iii) the parties have genuinely settled their differences including alimony, custody of child or
any other pending issues between the parties;
iv) the waiting period will only prolong their agony.”

REFLECTIONS

I was surprised to see a Domestic Violence case withdrawn by the wife when she received a
certain sum of money. It dilutes the struggles of women who suffer in reality.

10
DATE:14.09.22

DAY: Wednesday, Day 7

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15 A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

Was given the task to research on bail laws to find out a favourable ratio for a Special Leave
Petition (Criminal) that was to be filed in the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Brief facts: An FIR relating to misappropriation of Rs 25,53,581 was filed against the
accused. Arrests were made in 2019 and bail application was dismissed by the Trial Court
and High Court of Jharkhand on the ground of pendency of trial (that case is at the stage of
prosecution evidence)

Case law: Bhagirath Sinh Judeja vs State of Gujarat AIR 1984 SC 372

“…even where a prima facie case is established, the approach of the court in the matter of
bail is not that the accused should be detained by way of punishment but whether the
presence of the accused would be readily available for trial or that he is likely to abuse the
discretion grained in his favour by tampering with evidence”

JUDGEMENT OF THE DAY

Sanjay Chandra vs Central Bureau of Investigation

“The grant or refusal to grant bail lies within the discretion of the Court. The grant or denial
is regulated, to a large extent, by the facts and circumstances of each particular case. But at
the same time, right to bail is not to be denied merely because of the sentiments of the
community against the accused. The primary purposes of bail in a criminal case are to relieve
the accused of imprisonment, to relieve the State of the burden of keeping him, pending the
trial, and at the same time, to keep the accused constructively in the custody of the Court,
whether before or after conviction, to assure that he will submit to the jurisdiction of the
Court and be in attendance thereon whenever his presence is required.”

REFLECTIONS

At law school we are taught that bail is the rule, jail an exception. However, district courts
routinely reject bail applications even when the law says otherwise due to practical
considerations.

11
DATE: 15.09.22

DAY: Thursday, Day 8

PLACE: PATIALA HOUSE COURTS COMPLEX

TASK ASSIGNED

Visited the Court of Ld. Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate with seniors in the
following matter:

STATE Vs AHAD ALI @ AADI

Brief facts: The accused was charged under Section 4 of Arms Act for discovery of knife on a
random search conducted by Police during COVID lockdown.

The accused was acquitted and the case was disposed of. In compliance with Section 437A
CrPC, bail bonds were furnished by the accused and accepted by the Court.

JUDGEMENT OF THE DAY

In the case of Malti Devi Singh & Others v/s The State of Uttar Pradesh, whereby the
accuser’s conviction of causing injury to the respondent while acting in self-defence was
considered by the court under the principle of the uplifted knife, the court set aside the order
of the lower court for the appellant’s conviction provided a legal theory by an eminent jurist
the Justice Holmes who stated that “a detached reflection cannot be demanded in the
presence of an uplifted knife”, the appellant.

REFLECTIONS

Bail bonds are furnished under Section 437A of Code of Criminal Procedure even after
acquittal/conviction so as to allow the accused to complete the appellate proceedings. This
bail stays valid for 6 months.

Uplifted Knife Theory: the proposition that it is immoral for the state to punish a defendant
whose actions during an emergency situation could not have been impacted by the threat
of legal sanctions.

12
DATE: 16.09.22

DAY: Friday, Day 9

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

Drafted a complaint under Section 138 read with Section 142 Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881.

Brief facts: The complainant was a private limited company which had loaned out sum of
Rs.7,00,000 to the accused to purchase a second hand private vehicle Hyundai Creta. The
accused had issued a cheque for payment of monthly EMIs, which bounced. Following this, a
demand notice was sent but no payment was received.

Researched on the nature of relief available to a live-in partner in cases of domestic violence.

Case law: Lalita Toppo vs The State Of Jharkhand

“…under the provisions of the DVC Act, 2005 the victim i.e. estranged wife or live-in-
partner would be entitled to more relief than what is contemplated under Section 125 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, namely, to a shared household also.”

JUDGEMENT OF THE DAY

Indra Sarma vs V.K. Sarma (Supreme Court, 2013)

“…on the basis of above discussion cull out some guidelines for testing under what
circumstances, a live-in relationship will fall within the expression “relationship in the
nature of marriage” under Section 2(f) of the DV Act:

1) Duration of period of relationship: Section 2(f) of the DV Act has used the expression “at
any point of time”, which means a reasonable period of time to maintain and continue a
relationship which may vary from case to case, depending upon the fact situation.

(2) Shared household: The expression has been defined under Section 2(s) of the DV Act and,
hence, need no further elaboration.

(3) Pooling of Resources and Financial Arrangements Supporting each other

(4) Domestic Arrangements Entrusting the responsibility

(5) Sexual Relationship

(6) Children.

(7) Socialization in Public

(8) Intention and conduct of the parties”

13
DATE: 17.09.22

DAY: Saturday, Day 10

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 Filing of trademark under class 3 of trademark classification under the Fourth

Schedule to Trademark Rules, 2002

Class 3 . Bleaching preparations and other substances for laundry use; cleaning; polishing;
scouring and abrasive preparations; soaps; perfumery, essential oils, cosmetics, hair lotions,
dentifrices.

Details of trademark filed: VN AROMA (WITH DEVICES)

VN AROMA written with white colour in black background along with the image of an eagle
in golden colour above the text.

 Was asked to summarise the following case law:

Rakesh Malhotra vs Krishna Malhotra 2020(1)RCR(Criminal)1019

Issue: Whether after grant of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Act, a prayer can be
made before the Magistrate under Section 125 of the Code for maintenance over and above
what has been granted by the Court while exercising power under Section 25 of the Hindu
Marriage Act 1955?

Held: The Supreme Court directed that the application preferred under Section 125 of the
Code shall be treated and considered as one preferred under Section 25(2) of the Act.
Therefore, after grant of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Act, a prayer cannot be
made before the Magistrate under Section 125 of the Code for maintenance over and above
what has been granted by the Court while exercising power under Section 25 of the Hindu
Marriage Act 1955.

REFLECTIONS

The law although was enacted to safeguard interests of women, however the same tool
instead of being used as a shield but is being used as a sword.

14
DATE: 19.09.22

DAY: Monday, Day 11

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 To draft a mediation application form under rule 3(1) of the commercial courts (pre-
institution mediation & settlement) rules, 2018 read with section 12A of the
Commercial Courts act, 2015 along with supporting affidavit.

Read through the requisite statute- Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and corresponding
Commercial Courts Rules 2018. The following provisions were of consequence:

Nature of dispute: Section 2 (1) (xviii) agreements for sale of goods or provision of
services
S.12A: 12A. Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement—(1) A suit, which does not
contemplate any urgent interim relief under this Act, shall not be instituted unless the
plaintiff exhausts the remedy of pre- institution mediation in accordance with such
manner and procedure as may be prescribed by rules made by the Central
Government.

REFLECTIONS

The provision of pre-litigation mediation was instituted to enable suits of simple commercial
nature to be settled outside court. However, it has now become cumbersome as the other
party conveniently sits out.

15
DATE: 20.09.22

DAY: Tuesday, Day 12

PLACE: ROUSE AVENUE COURTS COMPLEX

TASK ASSIGNED

 Visited the court of Ld Metropolitan Magistrate with seniors in the following matter:

AMAZING RESEARCH LABORATORIES LTD VS NUTUN SINHA

Statute involved: S.138 r/w S. 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act

On behalf of: The complainant

Since the matter was settled between parties and the complainant had received the cheque
amount, the counsel was instructed to withdraw the case.

On this hearing, the offence u/s 138 NI Act stood compounded against the accused and the
accused was acquitted. Case was disposed of.

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A NOIDA

 Prepared affidavits for a DV Case on behalf of the complainant.

REFLECTIONS

The proceedings under NI Act are quasi criminal in nature and primarily governed by Cr.PC.
However, the trial is either a summary or summons trial. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has
held that the difference between these two types of trial is “subtle but grave”.

16
DATE: 20.09.22

DAY: Tuesday, Day 13

PLACE: SOUTH WEST, DWARKA COURTS

TASK ASSIGNED

 Visited the court of Ld. Additional District Judge in the following matter:

Creative Educational Aids Pvt Ltd v/s Daily Delite & Ors

Statutory provision involved: Section 135, Trademarks Act 1999

On behalf of: Plaintiff

It was a case of trademark infringement in toys and learning games. On this hearing, it
was submitted that since the court was of commercial nature, an application would be
moved before Ld. Principal District and Sessions Judge for transfer of present case to
Commercial Court.

The said request was allowed.

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

Drafted written statement in the following matter relating to possession and

permanent injunction:

Vijay Luthra vs Rekha Luthra

Brief facts: the plaintiff was the younger brother of respondent’s late husband who
illegally wanted to evict the respondent from a house jointly bought by the brothers.
Drafted the written statement.

REFLECTIONS

In practical terms, jurisdiction of courts plays a very important role. It is often the first
question asked by the judge, “how is the present suit maintainable”. Therefore, even if a
matter relates to Trademark, it is fascinating to see how principles of CPC and Commercial
Courts Act are intertwined and at play together.

17
DATE: 21.09.22

DAY: Wednesday, Day 14

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 Drafted an application on behalf of the defendant under ORDER IX RULE 7 C.P.C.

for setting aside the impugned order.

Order IX Rule 7 reads as:

Where the Court has adjourned the hearing of the suit ex-parte and the defendant, at
or before such hearing, appears and assigns good cause for his previous non-
appearance, he may, upon such terms as the Court directs as to costs or otherwise, be
heard in answer to the suit as if he had appeared on the day, fixed for his appearance.

The defendant moved an application for setting aside the ex parte order on grounds
such as non-receipt of summons and non-disclosure of material facts by the plaintiff.
Drafted an application for the same.

 Drafted a demand notice u/s 138 r/w S. 142 Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 for
payment of sum of Rs.2,40,000 on behalf of the complainant, Gulsan Finance
Company.

REFLECTIONS

The drafting of Order IX Rule 7 application did take some time. I learnt the importance of
using the right words, and was explained the consequence of putting information in the
application that could be detrimental to our case. The seniors also advised me to go through
the relevant provision in CPC again, which has been replicated above.

18
DATE: 22.09.22

DAY: Thursday, Day 15

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 Researched case laws on execution in maintenance cases. The following case laws
were of material consequence:

Amarendra Kumar Paul v. Maya Paul and Ors (2009) 8 SCC 359
Whether execution application under S.125 CrPc is barred by limitation?
Held: Period of limitation though provided in the first proviso to S.125(3), however,
in the instant case, S.15(1) Limitation Act would apply as on facts, order of stay was
granted by Revisional Court as also by High Court. Hence, limitation for filing
application for execution would be computed upon excluding the period during which
the order of stay was operating.

Shantha and Ors. v. B.G. Shivananjappa AIR 2005 SC 2410

“We are, therefore, of the view that in the peculiar circumstances of the case, the bar
under Section 125(3) cannot be applied and the High Court has erred in reversing the
order of Sessions Judge. It must be borne in mind that Section 125 Cr. P.C. is a
measure of social legislation and it has to be construed liberally for the welfare and
benefit of the wife and daughter. It is unreasonable to insist on filing successive
applications when the liability to pay the maintenance as per the order passed under
Section 125(1) is a continuing liability.”

REFLECTIONS

Time and again, the Hon’ble courts have construed the provision of S.125 Cr.P.C very
liberally and considered it social welfare legislation. Earlier, only orders of meagre
maintenance were provided under S125. However, these days, the courts have been granting
maintenance of higher amounts too, under the same section.

19
DATE: 23.09.22

DAY: Friday, Day 16

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 Filing of trademark under class 5 of trademark classification as provided in Fourth

Schedule of Trademark Rules 2002

Class 9 . Scientific, nautical, surveying, electric, photographic, cinematographic,

optical, weighing, measuring, signalling, checking (supervision), life saving and
teaching apparatus and instruments; apparatus for recording, transmission or
reproduction of sound or images; magnetic data carriers, recording discs; automatic
vending machines and mechanisms for coin-operated apparatus; cash registers,
calculating machines, data processing equipment and computers; fire extinguishing
apparatus.

Details of trademark filed: DEVICE MARK

IASSIST (WITH DEVICES)

IASSIST where I is written in small letters and assist written in capital letters with
white colour on blue background.

 Prepared affidavits on behalf of petitioner, as per judgement passed by the Hon'ble

High Court of Delhi in the matter of Rajat Gupta v/s Rupali Gupta in the case
772/2013 dated- 15/05/2018

REFLECTIONS

Legal documents do not have a hierarchy of importance. The Delhi High Court had instructed
the parties to file affidavits stating that they were not filing the petition in undue pressure and
with full knowledge and consent.

20
 DATE: 26.09.22

DAY: Monday, Day 17

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED:

 To draft an application under Order 6, Rule 17 of CPC seeking amendment of plaint

subsequent to a judgement passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.

Order 6 Rule 17 reads as:

Amendment of Pleadings : The Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either
party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be
just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of
determining the real questions in controversy between the parties:

Provided that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has
commenced, unless the Court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence,
the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial.

In the instant case, a Delhi HC judgement had laid down new guidelines regarding
suit valuation in matters of Intellectual Property Rights.

JUDGEMENT OF THE DAY

Vishal Pipes Limited v. Bhavya Pipe Industry (Delhi HC)

“66. In light of the above discussion, the following directions are issued:

(i) Usually, in all IPR cases, the valuation ought to be Rs.3 lakhs and above and
proper Court fee would have to be paid accordingly. All IPR suits to be
instituted before District Courts, would therefore, first be instituted before the
District Judge (Commercial).”

REFLECTIONS

The jurisdiction of courts, again, is an important issue that judges first consider while
dealing with a case. It took me some time to first understand why the plaint was to be
amended and thereafter draft the said application. I learnt that jurisdictions can change
while the case is pending.

21
DATE: 27.09.22

DAY: Tuesday, Day 18

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 Drafted a police complaint against accused for commission of offence of cheating,

forgery and falsification of record punishable u/s 420, 465,468, 471 I.P.C and other
appropriate sections of law.

Brief facts: that the accused person had illicitly generated forged letterhead and seal
of the complainant company and issued offer letter to one person by the name of
XXXXX and promised the said person salary of Rs 16500/-for the post of lab
attendant. That in lieu of giving forged offer letter the accused person took money
from the said person and later absconded.

 Prepared and attached affidavits to petition of divorce through mutual consent under
Hindu Marriage Act as per judgement passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in
the matter of Rajat Gupta v/s Rupali Gupta in the case 772/2013 dated- 15/05/2018

REFLECTIONS

Even while drafting a police complaint, one needs to be careful about the details mentioned
therein. While material facts have to be stated, the offence must be kept in mind.

22
DATE: 28.09.22

DAY: Wednesday, Day 19

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 Research on whether divorce can be granted on grounds not pleaded.

The following case laws were of consequence:

1. Suman Singh v. Sanju Singh AIR 2017 SC 1316

“In the first place, the respondent did not seek a decree of dissolution of marriage on these
grounds. Second, the grounds of cruelty taken by the respondent in his petition do not include
these grounds. Third, even if some stray allegations were made by the wife in her
pleading/evidence as were relied upon by the learned counsel are of no relevance because, as
mentioned above, these ground were not pleaded in the petition by the respondent for seeking a
decree of divorce and nor were put in issue; and lastly, the burden being on the respondent, the
same could be discharged by the respondent by pleading and then proving. It was not so done. It is
for these reasons, we cannot accept the aforementioned two submissions for affirming the decree
of divorce.”

2. K. Srinivas v. K. Sunita 2014 (10) SCJ 438

“6. Another argument which has been articulated on behalf of the learned counsel for
the Respondent is that the filing of the criminal complaint has not been pleaded in the
petition itself. As we see it, the criminal complaint was filed by the wife after filing of
the husband’s divorce petition, and being subsequent events could have been looked
into by the Court. In any event, both the parties were fully aware of this facet of
cruelty which was allegedly suffered by the husband. When evidence was lead, as
also when arguments were addressed, objection had not been raised on behalf of the
Respondent-Wife that this aspect of cruelty was beyond the pleadings. We are,
therefore, not impressed by this argument raised on her behalf.

7. In these circumstances, we find that the Appeal is well founded and deserves to be
allowed. We unequivocally find that the Respondent-Wife had filed a false criminal
complaint, and even one such complaint is sufficient to constitute matrimonial
cruelty.”

REFLECTIONS

In family matters, considerations to the facts of the case are paramount. Relief is decided and
moulded based on the facts of the case.

23
DATE: 29.09.22

DAY: Thursday, Day 20

PLACE: SAKET COURTS COMPLEX

TASK ASSIGNED

 Visited the court of Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate with senior in the following matter:

KAMAL SERVICES V/S PANKAJ

Statute: S.138 R/W 142 Negotiable Instruments Act 1881

Case was listed for Pre summoning evidence so that summons could be issued.
Query was raised in court regarding the amount in questions, to which the counsel
undertook to submit the statement of account of the complainant.

Pursuant to the same, the case was listed for the next date.

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

 Researched on the following legal proposition:

Whether the remedy of revision under section 397 CrPC lies against a summoning
order?

Amar Nath & Ors. vs. State of Haryana 1978(1) SCR 222, Supreme Court has held
that, “The impugned order of the Judicial Magistrate (for summoning the accused)
could not be said to be an interlocutory order and does not fall within the mischief of
s. 397(2) and, therefore, a revision against this order was fully competent under s.
397(1) or under s. 482 of the Code because the scope of both the sections in a matter
of this kind is more or less the same.

Madhu Limaye vs. The State of Maharashtra; AIR 1978 SC 47

the Supreme Court considered the very issue whether the revision against the order
taking cognizance or issuing process or framing charge was maintainable.

The Supreme Court observed in para10 that the order of the Court taking cognizance
or issuing process is not an interlocutory order.

24
DATE: 30.09.22

DAY: Friday, Day 21

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 Research on powers of a Matrimonial Court to direct a party to undergo medical

examination to determine mental illness of the party.

The following case law lays down the position:

SHARDA VS DHARMPAL AIR 2003 SC 3450

“…the Court having regard to the provisions contained in Order 32 Rule 15 of Code
of Civil Procedure, Section 41 of the Indian Lunacy Act as also for the purpose of
judging his competence to examine as a witness may issue requisite directions. It is,
therefore, not correct to contend that for the aforementioned purposes the Court has
no power at all. The prime concern of the Court is to find out as to whether a person
who is said to be mentally ill could defend himself properly or not. Determination of
such an issue although may have some relevance with the determination of the issue
in the lis, nonetheless, the Court cannot be said to be wholly powerless in this behalf.”

REFLECTIONS

The above judgement was delivered before the landmark K.S.Puttaswamy judgement, but
still dealt with whether such a proposition could infringe privacy of the individual.

The court elaborated that no right, including the right to privacy is absolute. If a matrimonial
court thinks that the mental state of party is of material consequence, it may order a
psychological evaluation and has ample powers to do it. This would not amount to an
infringement of right to privacy.

25
DATE: 1.10.22

DAY: Saturday, Day 22

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 To read through the following case file:

STATE VERSUS AKRAM

STATUTE: Section 354, 376(3), 506 of IPC and Section 6 and 8 of POCSO Act

STAGE OF TRIAL: Prosecution Evidence

Brief facts (for next date of hearing): The accused was booked under the
aforementioned sections for rape of a minor girl. The investigation had been
completed in 2019 itself. However, the accused was under trial for more than 3 years
now, which is why a bail application was to be moved on his behalf.

 Updated orders in case files by downloading from Ecourts and website of Delhi High
Court.
 Drafted a cease and desist notice on behalf of client for infringement of registered
trademark

REFLECTIONS

Managing an office requires efforts at many fronts- I learnt the relevance of discipline
in things going smoothly. A file with the last order not updated would not just
increase the workload for the next date of hearing but also create chaos and confusion
in an office. This will only increase as the size of firm increases. Hence, proper
upkeep and maintenance of files in order is a prerequisite for a successful legal
practice.

26
 DATE: 06.10.22

DAY: Thursday, Day 23

PLACE: ROHINI COURTS COMPLEX

TASK ASSIGNED

 Visited the court of Ld. Principal Family Judge, Rohini Court with senior in the
following matter:

VAISHALI VERSUS SOURAV MEHNDIRATTA

Brief facts: The above matter related to divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B
of Hindu Marriage Act, due to temperamental differences between the parties.

On this date of hearing, the second motion was finalised and divorce was granted.

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

 Updated case files by downloading orders of the day from Ecourts, Confonet and
Delhi High Court website

REFLECTIONS/LEARNING

A decree is issued some days later after completion of court proceedings. The parties
sign on the second motion and affix their thumb impressions on the document, which
becomes a part of court records.

27
 DATE: 7.10.22

DAY: Friday, Day 24

PLACE: STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

TASK ASSIGNED

 Visited the Court room of President’s Bench at SCDRC with a senior in the following
matter:

INDIAN RAILWAYS VS NIDHI SHARMA

On behalf of: Appellant

Brief facts: The respondent-complainant had instituted a complaint in the present

matter for her luggage that got stolen. The District forum awarded a sum of Rs 50,000
as compensation.

Railways filed an appeal for non-maintainability.

On this date of hearing, the respondent’s counsel sought adjournment which was
granted.

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15 A

Drafted a demand notice under section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act. The
complainant was a private limited company and had loaned out a sum of Rs 20,00,000
for the purpose of purchasing a Toyota Fortuner car. The cheque submitted by
respondent was dishonoured.

REFLECTIONS

Adjournments are always a tricky thing to have an opinion on. Sometimes they are
legitimate, sometimes they do not really serve a purpose.

28
 DATE: 10.10.22

DAY: Monday, Day 25

PLACE: HIGH COURT OF DELHI

TASK ASSIGNED

 Visited the Court of Justice Sanjeev Narula in the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi with
seniors in the following matter:

SUPERTECH URBAN HOME BUYERS ASSOCIATION (SUHA) FOUNDATION

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Brief facts: The complainants in these case purchased flats from Supertech
Builders for which they availed housing loan from Punjab National Bank.
However, construction stopped midway and it became apparent that the
homebuyers would not receive flats. Bank forced the homebuyers to deposit EMIs
and initiated SARFAESI proceedings against them. Not paying EMIs would also
affect their CIBIL score, which would make it difficult for them to avail loans in
future. Thus, the present writ petition.

On this date of hearing, the Court instructed that the interim order(s) were to
continue.

Interim Stay had already been granted against any coercive action by banks
against petitioner foe not paying EMIs.

REFLECTIONS

Visiting the High Court was an extraordinary experience in itself. One practically
observes how the parties stand differently than the district courts. Moreover, how a
lawyer utilises each minute available to deliver succinct and crisp points.

29
 DATE: 11.10.22

DAY: Tuesday, Day 26

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 Research on Court Fees Act and find out about valuation of a suit for declaration
simpliciter versus declaration with consequential relief.

The following case laws were of consequence:

Sarvinder Singh & Anr. vs The Chief Manager, Punjab (Delhi High Court)

“12. A suit for injunction simpliciter, as per Section 7(iv)(d) of the Court Fees Act,
is to be valued for the purpose of court fees, again as per the statement of the
plaintiff, at the amount at which the plaintiff values the relief sought and ad
valorem court fees paid thereon and vide Section 8 of the Suits Valuation Act, the
valuation thereof for the purpose of jurisdiction is to be the same.

13. There is however a common perception amongst the lawyers, that a suit for
injunction simpliciter can be valued differently for the purpose of jurisdiction and
court fees, with umpteen suits for injunction, with court fees of Rs.13/- only, being
filed in this Court.”

Hans Raj Kalra Vs. Kishan Raj Kalra 1976 SCC OnLIne Del 113
“Section 8 of the Suits Valuation Act incorporates an exception when it provides that
"where any suits other than those referred to in the Court Fees Act, 1870, Section 7,
paragraphs v, vi, and ix and paragraph x, clause (d), court fees are payable ad valorem
under the Court Fees Act, 1870, the valuation as determinable for the computation of
court fees and the value for purposes of jurisdiction shall be the same". The effect of
this provision is that in certain type of suits envisaged by the provision the value
determinable for the computation of court fees is also determinative of the value for
purposes of jurisdiction. In such cases the plaintiff must first value the suit for
purposes of court fees and the same valuation would ensure for purposes of
jurisdiction as well.”

REFLECTIONS

A careful reading of plaint gives enough room to get a case dismissed on preliminary grounds
itself! Each case must thus be carefully studied before jumping on to conclusions/defences.

30
DATE: 12.10.22

DAY: Wednesday, Day 27

PLACE: NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

TASK ASSIGNED

 Visited NCDRC with seniors and observed proceedings in the following matter:

Sohan Singhal vs Pan Realtors

On behalf of: Opposite Party

Brief facts: Complainant, a home buyer was aggrieved due to delay in handing over
the flats which had increased the cost of flats. Unwilling to pay the increased amount,
the complainant moved the Court.

On this hearing, the Commission directed both the parties to file written synopsis of
their submissions.

 Observed a client counselling session conducted by seniors with a leading Electric

scooters manufacturer.

Tendered advice to file a trademark in the Director’s own name so that he retains
rights over Intellectual Property in case of expansion of the company.

REFLECTIONS

To give an opinion to the client one needs to be fully prepared beforehand. This is
because there is little opportunity to consider the case in depth during the conference.
The mental and social tasks that are part of the conference itself will occupy the lawyer’s
mind most of the time. However, new information and perhaps a revised view of the case
materialises during discussions with the client. Therefore one has to rely upon his/her
preparation whilst doing some thinking on your feet or seat.

31
DATE: 13.10.22

DAY: Thursday, Day 28

PLACE: STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

TASK ASSIGNED:

Brief facts:

 Visited the Court of Principal Bench at SCDRC with senior in the following matter:

Indian Railways vs L.G.DASS

On behalf of: Appellant

Brief facts: The complainant was aggrieved due to “deficiency in services” by the
Indian Railways while travelling from New Delhi to Dibrugarh. He alleged that after a
brief spell of rain, his coach had inflow of water, thereby damaging his luggage under
the seat.

On this hearing, the respondent-complainant submitted that he will file reply to

application of condonation of delay.

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15 A

 Drafted a notice of opposition to application of registration of trademark in Class 25

of Trademark Classification under the Trademark Rules 2002.

Class 25 . Clothing, footwear, headgear

Grounds: That opponent had an established business, that the mark used was
deceptively similar, prior use of mark by the opponent.

REFLECTIONS

Visiting a tribunal often, at first blush, gives the impression that it is nothing but a
court. However, there are subtle differences, right from the position of parties to
proceedings.
32
DATE: 14.10.22

DAY: Friday, Day 29

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 Accompanied seniors in a client counselling session and observed the following:

- How to initiate conversations with the client

- How to get the client talking/disclose facts
- Establishing rapport
- Soliciting the client’s views
- Figuring out his exact demands

In the present counselling, a fresh trademark was to be filed under Class 3 of

Trademark Classification as provided in the Fourth Schedule to Trademark Rules
2002.

The client was advised to apply using his MSME Udyog certificate which reduces
the application by half.

 Updated case files by downloading and attaching orders of the day from ecourts
website.

REFLECTIONS

Listening well can be surprisingly difficult to do. Although it may seem to involve simply
sitting back, not talking, and hearing what clients say, it is not that easy. Studies show that
people normally speak at the rate of about 125 words per minute while we are able to listen
at a rate of 500 words a minute. I learnt how lawyers fill this gap determines whether they are
listening effectively.

33
DATE: 15.10.22

DAY: Saturday, Day 30

PLACE: OFFICE AT SECTOR 15A, NOIDA

TASK ASSIGNED

 Drafted an application under Right to Information Act 2005 addressed to Deputy

Drug Controller, Drugs Control Department, Karkardooma Delhi

RTI Draft on whether any entity/entities have submitted application to your office for
obtaining manufacturing license/ approval for manufacturing Sacubitril + Valsratan
(LCZ696) or Sacubitril/Valsartan or Sacubitril Valsartan or Sacubitril/Valsartan
trisodium salt complex or Sacubitril/Valsartan (as sodium salt complex) active
pharmaceutical ingredient (API) or Bulk drug for export and/or domestic market.

 Conducted a trademark search under Class 5 on Indian registry at ipindia.gov.in.

Class 5 . Pharmaceutical, veterinary and sanitary preparations; dietetic substances

adapted for medical use, food for babies; plasters, materials for dressings; materials
for stopping teeth, dental wax; disinfectants; preparation for destroying vermin;
fungicides, herbicides

 Filed a trademark application under Class 5 of Trademark Classification as provided

under Schedule 4 of Trademark Rules, 2002

Category: WORD MARK

TRADEMARK: EYPOD

DESCRIPTION: Medicinal and Pharmaceuticals Preparations and Substances

including in Class 5

REFLECTIONS

The Right to Information Act is a simple and powerful tool to hold the executive responsible.
I learnt that before RTI came into operation, there was virtually no method of executive
accountability! However, certain issues like delays and vacancies need to be ironed out, still.

34
LEGAL DOCUMENTS DRAFTED
DURING THE COURSE OF
INTERNSHIP

35
IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF SH. SANJEEV AGGARWAL, DISTRICT
JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT)-03, SOUTH DISTRICT, SAKET
COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS/DJ No.

IN THE MATTER OF:

UNDER ARMOUR …Plaintiff

Versus

MUKESH KUMAR …Defendant

APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF UNDER ORDER VI

RULE 17 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SEEKING
AMENDMENT OF PLAINT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

1. That the instant suit is pending adjudication before this Hon’ble Court.

2. That during the pendency of this suit Hon’ble High Court of Delhi passed a
judgment in an appeal bearing No. FAO-IPD 1/2022 titled as Vishal Pipes
Limited v. Bhavya Pipe Industry.

3. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the aforementioned Judgment has

opined that normally in all IPR matters the valuation ought to be Rs. 3 Lakhs
and more. For ease in reference, relevant portion of said Judgment is
reproduced as under:
36
“66. In light of the above discussion, the following directions are issued:

(i) Usually, in all IPR cases, the valuation ought to be Rs.3 lakhs and above and
proper Court fee would have to be paid accordingly. All IPR suits to be
instituted before District Courts, would therefore, first be instituted before the
District Judge (Commercial).”

4. Accordingly, in view of the above said Judgment, plaintiff has to amend the
plaint in respect of valuation of the specified value of the plaintiff’s
intellectual property right and valuation of the suit in respect of damages.

5. Furthermore, after a thorough review, certain inadvertent error/mistakes

have been detected in Para 35 (a) and (b) of the original plaint. In the same
para the plaintiff has wrongly mentioned Para 36 as Para 37 which is the
prayer clause. The Plaintiff therefore intends to rectify the said error in the
amended plaint.

6. In view of the above plaintiff is desirous of amending the plaint and

substituting the Para 35 (a) and (b), Para 31, and Para 36(d) of the plaint and
new para to be read as under.

Para 31 of the original plaint:

That due to the impugned activities of the Defendants, the Plaintiff is

suffering huge losses both in business and in reputation, and such losses
are incapable of being assessed in monetary terms. Unwary purchasers
and trade are being deceived as to the origin of goods or business. The
Defendants' gains are Plaintiff's losses. The Plaintiff has no access to the
Defendants' accounts and the Defendants are liable to render their
accounts to the Plaintiff and to make good to the Plaintiff the profits and
business earned by them. Without prejudice to the rendition of accounts
and in alternative thereto, the Defendants are liable to pay damages to the

37
Plaintiff, which the Plaintiff conservatively and in restricted manner
claims to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/ (Rupees One Lakh only) even though
the Plaintiff is entitled to much more.

Para 31 be substituted as below:

31. That due to the impugned activities of the Defendants, the Plaintiff
is suffering huge losses both in business and in reputation, and such
losses are incapable of being assessed in monetary terms. Unwary
purchasers and trade are being deceived as to the origin of goods or
business. The Defendants' gains are Plaintiff's losses. The Plaintiff has no
access to the Defendants' accounts and the Defendants are liable to render
their accounts to the Plaintiff and to make good to the Plaintiff the profits
and business earned by them. Without prejudice to the rendition of
accounts and in alternative thereto, the Defendants are liable to pay
damages to the Plaintiff, which the Plaintiff conservatively and in
restricted manner claims to the tune of Rs. 3,10,000/ (Rupees Three Lakh
Ten Thousand only) even though the Plaintiff is entitled to much more.

Para 35 (a) of the original plaint:

For the grant of permanent injunction as prayed for in para 37 (a) (i to iv)
and 37 (b), for delivery up as prayed for in para 37 (c), it is valued for the
purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction at Rs. 200/- each and the Court fee
of Rs. 20/- each totaling Rs 140/- is affixed.

Para 35(a) be substituted as below:

For the grant of permanent injunction as prayed for in para 36 (a) (i to iv)
and 36 (b), for delivery up as prayed for in para 36 (c), it is valued for the

38
purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction at Rs. 200/- each and the Court fee
of Rs. 20/- each totaling Rs 140/- is affixed.

Para 35 (b) of the original plaint:

For the relief of damages as prayed for in para 37(d). It is valued at Rs.
1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) and appropriate Court fee of Rs.3500
/- is paid thereon. The Plaintiff craves leave to reserve its right under the
provisions of Order 2 Rule 2 CPC to pray for suitable additional damages
or in the alternative, rendition of account [as prayed in para 37 (e)] at the
appropriate stage in the proceedings, when the same become
ascertainable and accordingly additional court fees shall be affixed
thereon. Total court fee paid is Rs. 3640/-. In view of the above, it is
submitted that this Hon'ble Court has the sufficient pecuniary jurisdiction
to try and entertain the present suit.

Para 35(b) be substituted as below:

“35(b). For the relief of damages as prayed for in para 36(d), it is valued
at Rs. 3,10,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Ten Thousand Only) and
appropriate Court fee of Rs.5370/- is paid thereon. The Plaintiff craves
leave to reserve its right under the provisions of Order 2 Rule 2 CPC to
pray for suitable additional damages or in the alternative, rendition of
account [as prayed in para 36(e)] at the appropriate stage in the
proceedings, when the same become ascertainable and accordingly
additional court fees shall be affixed thereon. Total court fee paid is Rs.
5510/-. In view of the above, it is submitted that this Hon’ble Court has

39
 the sufficient pecuniary jurisdiction to try and entertain the present suit.”

Para 36 (d) of the original plaint:

For the decree of grant of damages to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees

One Lakh Only) from the Defendant to the Plaintiff;”

Para 36(d) be substituted as below:

“36(d). For the decree of grant of damages to the tune of Rs.3,10,000/-

(Rupees Three Lakh Ten Thousand Only) from the Defendant to the
Plaintiff;”

7. It is submitted that the Plaintiff has already paid Rs. 3640/- by way of court
fees for the previous valuation at Rs. 1,00,000/- and additional court fees of
Rs. 1870/- is affixed herewith.

8. The subject matter Suit pertains to Intellectual Property Right of the

Plaintiff, which is a commercial dispute as defined under the Commercial
Court Act 2015. It is also submitted that the specified value of the
intellectual property of the Plaintiff is broadly over Rs.3 Lakhs, which is the
threshold figure of the Commercial Court.

9. The aforementioned enhancement in valuation of the suit in relation to relief

pertaining to rendition of account has also been necessitated in view of
Judgment dated 03.06.2022 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in
Appeal bearing FAO-IPD 1/2022 titled as Vishal Pipes Limited Vs Bhavya
Pipe Industry.

40
10. The amendments sought in the plaint are relevant, necessary and pivotal for
proper adjudication and determination of the instant case of the plaintiff.

11. The aforementioned amendment could not have been sought at the earlier
stage as the same occasioned on account of the subsequent events as also in
view of aforementioned Vishal Pipe Judgment which came recently, after
institution of Suit.

12. The plaintiff could not have sought the said amendments even after exercise
of due diligence.

13. The reasons for not seeking of amendment at the earlier stage, is beyond the
control of the plaintiff.

14. That there are sufficient reasons for not seeking of amendment at the earlier
stage.

15. There is no delay in filing the present application.

16. By filing the present amendment application, there is no change in the cause
of action.

17. No prejudice will be caused if the said amendments are allowed as the
defendant would be at liberty to contest the instant enhancement of
valuationfor relief pertaining to rendition of accounts done by the Plaintiff.

18. That the present application is being filed bona-fide and inthe interest of
justice, equity and good conscience.

19. Amended plaint is being filed herewith.

41
 PRAYER

20. That in view of the averments and submissions made hereinabove, it is most
respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court kindly be pleased to:

a) Allow the Plaintiff to amend the plaint as per Para No.6 of the instant
application.

b) Take on record the amended plaint.

c) Pass any other and further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit
and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Prayed accordingly,

THROUGH

Advocates for the Plaintiff

Place: New Delhi

Date: .09.2022

42
 IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF MS. SAVITA RAO,

DISTRICT JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURTS) - 04, KARKARDOOMA

COURT, NEW DELHI

CS (COMM) No.

IN THE MATTER OF:

HARISH KUMAR ….PLAINTIFF

Vs

SDS INFRATECH ….DEFENDANT

APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT UNDER ORDER

IX RULE 7 C.P.C. FOR SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 14.09.2022

Most Respectfully Showeth:

1. The above-mentioned Suit for recovery under Order XXXVII was filed by
Plaintiff and the same was fixed on 28.19.2022 for ex-parte final arguments.

2. That the Defendant company herein is represented by its authorized

representative, Mr. Sunil Agrawal, appointed vide Board Resolution dated
15.02.2022. Copy of the Board resolution is annexed hereto and marked as
Annexure – D1.

43
3. That vide order dated 14.09.2022 passed by this Hon’ble Court, the
defendant was proceeded ex-parte due to non-appearance of the defendant
and not filing the written statement before the court. Copy of the order dated
14.09.2022 passed by this Hon’ble Court is annexed hereto and marked as
Annexure – D2.

4. That this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 31.05.2022 issued summons to the
Defendant by way of publication in the “The Statesman” newspaper. This
Hon’ble Court passed the following order:

“CS(Comm) no. 541/2021

Harish Kumar v. M/s. SDS Infratech (P) Ltd.

31.05.2022

Present: Mr. Honey Kaushik, counsel for the plaintiff

It is already reported on the process issued to defendant by speedpost that it is

unserved.

It is already reported on the process that the office of the defendant was lying
closed despite the process server visiting the premises several times, the process
could not be served – Baar Baar jane par, praptkarta ka office band rehta hai.

1. This is a suit under Order 37 CPC.

2. File has been taken up today as an application under

order V rule 17 CPC has been filed on behalf of the
plaintiff.

44
3. It is submitted by the counsel for the plaintiff that
defendant is not to be available at the given address. The
counsel for the plaintiff has submitted that no other
addresses of the defendant is available with the plaintiff.

4. Heard. Perused. Considered.

5. In view of the submissions made, contents of the

application and the reports on the process issued to the
defendant, it appears that defendant cannot be served by
ordinary process and it appears that it is avoiding the
service.

6. Accordingly, the application of the plaintiff under

order V rule 17 CPC for substituted service of the
defendant through publication as well as by way of
affixation is hereby allowed.

7. Summons of the suit in prescribed format of under

order 37 CPC be served upon the defendant by way of
publication in the newspaper “The Stateman” vide PF
& on deposit of necessary publication charges as well
as by way of affixation for date already fixed in this
case i.e. 22.08.2022.

8. Summons of the suit in prescribed format of under

order 37 CPC be issued to the defendant on filing of
PF, RC, AD and Speed Post on taking of steps within
three working days for date already fixed in this case
i.e. 22.08.2022.

45
 9. Matter now be listed for service of the defendant, as
elaborated above and for further proceedings for date
already fixed in this case i.e. 22.08.2022.

(NIVEDITA ANIL SHARMA)

District Judge,

Commercial Court – 01,

Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts,

Delhi. 31.05.2022”

5. That the Defendant was served the summons through mode of publication in
“The Statesman Newspaper” on 24.06.2022. Copy of the newspaper
publication is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure – D3.

6. That the Plaintiff has misled the Hon’ble Court and fraudulently obtained the
ex-parte order dated 14.09.2022. That the Applicant learnt about the said
facts only when he received the information from his friend/relative about
the present case going against the Defendant before this Hon’ble court.

7. That the ex-parte order dated 14.09.2022 which was passed by this Hon’ble
Court is liable to be set aside by this Hon’ble Court on the following
amongst other grounds:

46
 A. Because the Defendant never had the knowledge about the present
proceedings going against the Defendant company.

B. Because the Defendant was never made aware of the present suit
proceedings despite performing due diligence in every manner possible.

C. Because the Defendant never received any copy of the summons or the
plaint or the documents on its registered address.

D. Because the Plaintiff failed to serve the Defendants according to the

procedure laid down under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

E. Because the Defendants have been falsely dragged before this Hon’ble
Court by the Plaintiff and this court has been misled by the Plaintiff.

F. Because the Plaintiff deliberately failed to disclose the material facts to

this Hon’ble court thereby causing precious time of this court.

G. Because the Defendant never had the ill intention to ignore the summons
or notice of this Hon’ble Court. Moreover, no deliberate attempt has been
made by the Defendant to delay the proceedings of this Hon’ble Court.

8. The Plaintiff filed the above-mentioned Suit on false grounds and by

suppressing material facts from the Hon’ble Court. In fact, there were no
dues of the Plaintiff against the Defendant. On the contrary, the dues were
towards the Plaintiff and not towards the Defendant.

9. In fact, the Defendant has ample documents to disprove the entire story of
the Plaintiff and if opportunity is not granted to him to disprove the same, it
will cause irreparable loss and grave legal injury to the Applicant/Defendant.

47
10. The Defendant inquired about the pendency of present case from his
friend/relative and was shocked to learn that the Plaintiff had fraudulently
and by concealing material facts managed to get the impugned ex-parte order
from this Hon’ble Court. The Applicant/Defendant then approached a
Counsel at Delhi, who inspected the said case file and hence the present
Application.

11. The present Application has been moved bona-fidely by the

Applicant/Defendant to safeguard his interest and on coming to know about
the impugned order passed by this Hon’ble Court. It is pertinent to mention
herein that the Defendant was carrying on his business from the address
mentioned in the Suit, till ………… and till that time no notice or summons
of this Hon’ble Court were ever received by the Applicant/Defendant.

PRAYER

In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is prayed that this Hon’ble
Court be pleased to set aside the Ex-parte order dated 14.09.2022 passed in CS
(COMM) No. _____titled as “Harish Kumar v. SDS Infratech” and allow the
Applicant/Defendant to contest the Suit on merits and/or pass any other further
Order(s) deemed proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

48
 Applicant/Defendant

Through

ADVOCATES FOR THE PLAINTIFF

Chamber no. 475, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi

Email: [email protected]

Place: Delhi

Date:

49
 IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SAKET COURTS, DISTT SOUTH EAST NEW DELHI
SUIT NO..............OF 2022

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/S SPUDDY SPORTS PVT. LTD.

Through its Director
House no. 1, Ground Floor,
Tower-5 PARSVNATH GREEN VILLE,
SOHNA ROAD Gurgaon,
Haryana- 122001. ....PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

1. Virender Singh Gandas

R/O Shourya Sagar Garden(Sagar Farm),

D-4 Ram Mandir Road,

Kishangarh, Vasant Kunj

Delhi-110070 …DEFENDANT No. 1

2. Satish Kumar Gandas

R/O Shourya Sagar Garden

(Sagar Farm),D-4 Ram Mandir Road,

Kishangarh, Vasant Kunj

Delhi-110070 ...DEFENDANT No. 2

50
SUIT UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF THE CODE OF CIVIL

PROCEDURE, 1908 FOR THE RECOVERY OF A SUM OF RS.

6,90,000/- ALONG WITH PENDENTE LITE AND FUTURE INTEREST

@ 12% P.A.

THE PLAINTIFF ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS:-

1. That the Plaintiff herein is filing the present Suit under Code of Civil

Procedure, thereby, inter alia, seeking that the Defendants herein be directed to

pay a sum of Rs 6,90,000/- (Rs Six Lakh Ninety Thousand Only) along with

past, present and future interest @ 12% per annum from the date as on amount

first paid along with consideration amount.

2. That the brief facts leading up to the filing of the present Suit are as follows:-

2.1 That Plaintiff is a Private Limited Company having its office

at House no. 1, Ground Floor, Tower-5 PARSVNATH

GREEN VILLE, SOHNA ROAD Gurgaon Haryana 122001

and is engaged in the business of providing Badminton

Training and running Badminton Academy across Delhi

NCR region and enjoys immense goodwill and reputation

throughout the country for the quality of its facilities and

services.

51
2.2 The Plaintiff company has authorized XXXXXXX, one of

the director of the plaintiff company vide resolution dated

___________ to sign, Verify and depose and institute the

present suit against the accused before this Hon’ble court on

behalf of the plaintiff company. The said board resolution is

annexed herewith as Annexure- __

2.3 That the Defendants are individuals who are brothers of each

other in relation.

2.4 That the defendants approached the Plaintiff for setting up a

Badminton Academy on their vacant land at Sagar Farm,

Ram Mandir Road, Kishangarh, Vasant Kunj (Delhi).

2.5 That the defendant allured the Plaintiff by offering him to set

up a Badminton Academy on the said land and to run their

Badminton Academy in exchange of a monthly rent to be

paid by the Plaintiff.

2.6 That in furtherance the Plaintiffs and Defendant no. 1 and

Defendant no. 2 entered into a mutual oral agreement

whereby upon a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- as monthly rent to be

paid by the Plaintiff to the defendant for the purpose of

occupying and using the said premises for running the

Badminton Academy.

52
 2.7 That the Defendant No.1 and Defendant No. 2 assured the

Plaintiff for an absolute ownership of the said land along

with unfettered rights over its possession. Based on the

assurances of defendants the plaintiff agreed to have

peaceful possession of the said land in accordance with the

mutually agreed terms and conditions.

2.8 That the plaintiffs as per the terms and conditions, made the

advance payment of one month’s rent along with two month’s

security to the Defendants as consideration for tenancy the said

land.

2.9 That the plaintiff duly paid the total consideration amount of

Rs.5,40,000/- (one month’s advance rent + two months’ security)

as and when agreed upon by the parties. Half of the total amount

(after TDS) i.e., Rs.2,61,000/- was paid by my client via cheque

while rest of the amount was paid by the plaintiff in cash. A copy

of account statement of the Plaintiff Company showing the said

transaction is annexed herewith as Annexure- __

2.10 That the defendants were bound to handover the peaceful

possession of the said vacant land to my client after the

satisfaction of the consideration amount.

2.11 That on the payment of full consideration amount by the

Plaintiff, the defendants authorized the plaintiff to set up his

53
 academy on the said land. Thereafter, plaintiff made all the

arrangements for running his Badminton Academy. In

pursuance of the same, the plaintiff ordered various raw

materials and goods for setting up the badminton academy ,

bearing all the expenses on his own, which amounts to

Rs.1,50,000/- (Rs One Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) (approx.).

A copy of bills of the purchased materials by the plaintiff is

annexed herewith as Annexure- A__

2.12 That further to the utter shock and surprise to the plaintiff the

defendants in contravention of the terms prevented the

plaintiff from entering the premises also the defendants have

taken over all the equipments and belongings of the plaintiff

kept on the said land.

2.13 That despite repeated requests from the plaintiffs the

defendants with malafide intentions ignored the requests put

forth by the plaintiff and made excuses on one pretext or

another.

2.14 That the plaintiffs have been repeatedly calling upon the

defendants and requesting them to allow access of the said

premises. However, the defendants have consistently denied

the Plaintiff to enter the said premises for running his

54
 Badminton Academy and have been sitting silently over the

same.

2.15 That the defendants have not paid heed to the plaintiffs

request and have deliberately and fraudulently ignored the

Plaintiff whenever he tried to contact the defendant in

relation of the premises.

2.16 That such conduct on part of the defendants has caused

unwarranted harassment and financial losses to the plaintiff

for which the defendants are solely liable.

2.17 That Plaintiff had totally lost his faith on Defendant and

requested Defendants to make the payment of a sum of Rs.

5,40,000/- (Rs. Five lakh and Forty Thousand Rupees only)

for the rent amount along with Rs.1,50,000/- (One lakh and

Fifty Thousand Rupees only) to the Plaintiff for the

investment made by him on the said land with a view to run

its Academy.

2.18 That resultantly, left with no other option, the Plaintiff

Company was constrained to serve a Legal Notice dated

11.08.2022 sent on _________ upon the Defendants through

plaintiff’s Advocate by way of Speed Post asking to make

the outstanding amount of, within a period of fifteen (15)

days from the date of receipt of the Notice. However, despite

55
 receiving the said Legal Notice respectively by the

Defendants didn’t care to clear the outstanding amount, i.e.,

Rs 6,90,000/- (Rs Six Lakh Ninety Thousand Only.

Though a reply to the said legal notice was given by the

defendants through their counsel. The said reply is annexed

herewith as Annexure- A

2.19 That the Defendants with a malafide intention, to cheat and

usurp money of Plaintiff fraudulently gave many false

assurances to Plaintiff.

2.20 That the cause of action to file the present suit accrued on

each and every date when the plaintiff was prevented from

entering the premises of the said agreed rented property. The

cause of action further accrued when the Defendants took

over all the equipments and belongings of the plaintiff kept

on the said land. The cause of action further accrued on

despite repeated requests from the plaintiff the defendants

with malafide intentions ignored the requests put forth by the

plaintiff and made excuses on one pretext or another. Hence

cause of action accrued in favour of the plaintiff and against

the defendants. Hence this suit.

2.21 That the present suit being filed by the plaintiffs against the

defendant is the first suit and no such suit has been

56
 previously filed, pending or decided by any court of law on

the same subject matter.

2.22 That defendants are resident of shourya sagar Garden(Sagar

Farm), D-4 Ram Mandir Road, Kishangarh, Vasant Kunj

which falls under the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble

court. Also the subject matter of the dispute i.e. the property

is located is located in the territorial jurisdiction of this

Hon'ble Court. Also, all the transactions and business

activities were also done within the territorial jurisdiction of

this Hon’ble Court hence this Hon'ble Court has each and

every jurisdiction to try and entertain this suit.

2.23 That the present Suit is being filed well within the prescribed

period of limitation as provided for under the relevant law

for the time being in force governing the limitation of Suits.

PRAYER

It is therefore in the light of the above noted facts and circumstances it is most
respectfully prayed to this Hon’ble court may be pleased to:

(i). Pass a Decree thereby directing the Defendants to pay to the

Plaintiff a sum of Rs 6,90,000/- (Rs Six Lakh Ninety Thousand

Only) alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. from the date as on amount

first paid along with consideration amount.

57
 (ii). Award the costs of litigation in favour of the Plaintiffs and

against the Defendant herein;

(iii). Pass any other or such further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court

may deem fit and proper to pass in view of the true facts and

circumstances of the present case.

PLAINTIFF

THROUGH

ADVOCATES FOR THE PLAINTIFF

CHAMBER NO.475,
PATIALA HOUSE COURT COMPLEX,
NEW DELHI-100001
NEW DELHI
DATED:

58