Himanshu Barot

PRACTICAL TRAINING – IV
TYLLB
ROLL NO: 3

1. CIVIL PROCEEDING:

A. Recording of observations and co-relations with relevant provision of

law
IN THE COURT OF III CIVIL JUDGE CLASS II, BHOPAL
AT BHOPAL
RCS 618A/2019

M. K. Shrivastava
…..Plaintiff
Versus
Awadesh Shrivastava ……
Defendant

Court Room No. A2

In the court of Justice Vijay Suryavanshi
Date: February 24, 2020

Proceedings brief:-
1. The counsel of the Defendant No. 1, presented an application under
order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
 2. The Judge accepted the application and provided a copy of the same to
other parties of the suit.
3. The said application was presented by the counsel of the Defendant
No. 1 seeking stay or temporary injunction to be granted to
proceedings in the said civil suit.

Observations:-

1. The Hon’ble Judge thus provided the parties time to prepare their
arguments on the said application forwarded by the Defendant No. 1
requesting the Hon’ble Court to grant temporary injunction to restrain
the other parties from constructing or selling the property in dispute.
2. The Hon’ble Judge heard the matter and thereafter the postponed the
matter on merit date for argument on the said application by the
Defendant No.1.

B. Recording of observations and co-relations with relevant provision of

law

IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT MUNSIF: TIRUPATI

O.S.No.234 of 1994

Between -Sri M. Mahadeva Naidu ………….…………

Plantiff

V/S

Sri R. Veera Reddy ……….

………..Defendant

PLAINT PRESENTED UNDER OR VII RULE 1 AND SEC. 26 OF C.P.C.

(1) Address of the Plaintiff:

Sri M. Mahadeva Naidu, S/o. Anganelu, Hindu, aged about 37 years working in
T.T. Devasthanam and residing at No.14 ‘E’ type quarters N.G.O. Colony,
Tirupati.

For the services of summons, notices etc. to the address of the plaintiff as
stated above and of his counsel.
(2) Address of the defendant:-

Sri R. Veera Reddy, S/o. Ramachandra Reddy, Hindu, aged about 52 years,
businessman and residing at No.101, R.R. Colony, Tirupati.
For the services of summons, notices etc. to the address of the defendant as
stated above.

(3) The defendant is running a business on provisions and is having his shop
at Bazar
Street, Tirupati to run the business to purchase provisions for his shop from
the wholesale dealer he was in urgent need of some funds. Hence the
approached the plaintiff demanding some loan from him. Both are known to
each other for many years.

(4) The defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.50000/- (fifty thousand only) from
the plaintiff
on 16-09-1992 for his family business and to discharge some sundry debts,
agreeing to repay the some on demand either to the plaintiff or to his agent
with an interest at the rate of 24% p.a. and executed the suit promissory note
on the same date at Tirupati.

(5) Later on, inspite of several oral demands made by the plaintiff and his
servants, agents, the defendant did not paid a single pie either towards
interest or towards Principal.

(6) Hence the plaintiff issued a registered notice through his counsel to the
defendant, on 5th June 1995 calling upon the defendant to repay the said
debt with the accused interest, through the defendant duly received the
notice on 8th June 1995 he failed to reply nor to pay.

(7)The cause or action for this suit has arisen on and from 16th September 92
when the suit debt is borrowed by the defendant and executed the suit pro-
note on and from 5th June 95 when the notice was sent calling the defendant
to repay on and 8th June, 95. When the defendant duly received notice at
Tirupati with in the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.

(8) The plaintiff valued the suit at Rs.85,500/- and paid a court fees of Rs. …
and paid a
court fees of Rs……………….. u/s.20 of Andhra Pradesh Court fees and suit
valuation Act.

Therefore it is prayed that this Hon’ble court may be pleased to pass a

decree and judgment in favour of the plaintiff.
(a) Directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.85,500/- (Rupees eighty five
thousand and five hundred only) and the future interest there on from the
date of the plaint till the date of realization
 (b) Directing the defendant to pay the costs of this proceedings and
(c) Granting such other further reliefs that Hon’ble court deems fit and proper
under the circumstances of this case and thus render justice

Plaintiff

On 12th Feb. 1996 we went to District Munisif Court Tirupati where this above
stated case O.S.234/95 was taken for evidence, Defandant was called out and
set exparte. Plaintiff was as PW1 exparte examination.

Judgment : - The suit is decreed in the costs.

C. Recording of observations and co-relations with relevant provision of

law

01.09.2017
IN THE COURT OF ANURAG JAIN, ADJ, KARKADOOMA COURT, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

NAVNEET RATHI VS. ATUL

GARMENTS

SECTIONS INVOLVED
Application Under Order 9, Rule 9 CPC, 1908
Suit for recovery of money amounted 13,13,107
OBSERVATION
Appearing on behalf of the plaintiff
Service of Notice affected to Defendant -1,2 and 3. Direction for issue of fresh notice
was given

ORDER/JUDGEMENT: PENDING
N.D.O.H. 26.09.2017
2. CRIMINAL PROCEEDING:

A. Recording of observations and co-relations with relevant provision of

law
IN THE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
IX CIVIL JUDGE CLASS-I, BHOPAL
AT BHOPAL
IN
RCT 2816/2020
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ……
COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
NITIN VISHWARKARMA
AND OTHERS
………….ACCUSSED
Under Section 498A, 34 of Indian Penal Code under Section 3/ 4 of Dowry Prohibition
Act, 1961
Date: February 24, 2020

Proceedings brief
1. The present case was filed by the Complainant against the Accused on the
sections mentioned above.
2. The accused received summons to appear before the trial court with regards
to the matter mentioned above on February 24, 2020.
3. The advocate of accused number -1, Nitin Vishwarkarma filed his
vakalatnama and marked appearance.
4. The other parties also marked their appearance before the Hon’ble Judge.

Observations:
1. The Hon’ble Judge passed a comment, obiter dicta, while the appearance
of the parties, making appearance of the parties, compulsory on the day
of filing vakalatanama along with advocates.
2. The Hon’ble Judge adjourned the said matter on March 30, 2020. The
matter is kept for argument before charge.

B. Recording of observations and co-relations with relevant provision of

law
IN THE COURT OF MS. ROSHANI GUPTA, M. M. TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

NAVEEN KUMAR JAIN

………….COMPLAINANT

VERSUS
AMIT CHAHUAN ……
RESPONDENTS

SECTION INVLOVED:

U/S 200 OF CR. P.C. R/W 155(4) C.P.C

OBSERVATION:-

The complaint was filed for adultery against the accused. The arguments
have been addressed by the counsels of complainant and respondent.

ORDER/JUDEGEMENT: PENDING

NOW THE MATTER IS FIXED FOR: DDMMYY