COURT DIARY

Submitted by:
DIVYANSH TANEJA
V-L
06517703519

Vivekananda School of Legal Studies

Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies
Accredited Grade “A” by NAAC, Recognized under
Section 2(f) of UGC, Affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh
Indraprastha University, Recognized by Bar Council of
India Approved BY AICTE, ISO 9001:2015 AU Block,
Outer Ring Road, Pitampura, Delhi – 110034

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to acknowledge and express my deep gratitude to the

entire person who have been my constant support, source of
encouragement and inspiration and have helped me in successful
compiling and completing this Internship Report for time bound
submission.
I take profound sense of pride to convey my gratefulness towards my
university- Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and my
Institution- Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies , for
providing me with this great opportunity to such an enlightening
internship.
I also take extreme delight and thankfulness to my sir, Advocate A.F
Faizi and Advocate Aamir Chaudhary, for providing me with all the
guidance, care and knowledge in the duration of my internship and I
look forward to work again with him in the near future.
In the end, I would also like to thank my professor, my family, and
my friends for being a fountain of love and support during internship
as well as at the time of drafting of this report.

2
 INTRODUCTION:

I did my internship from the month of March- April and August-

September. Throughout this period, I was cultured concerning the
scheme to maintain a file diverse pre forma which were to be put
forward before the court of law intended for satisfying various
objectives. I attended a variety of court trials subsequent to summer
vacations which helped me a lot to be aware of the running of court.

3
 DECLARATION

I do hereby declare that this report as compiled by me under my

summer internship programme is based on my own experiences ad
observations to the best of my knowledge and understanding in its
duration and the same which is submitted therefore to
VIVEKANANDA INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL STUDIES
affiliated to GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA
UNIVERSITY is reliable document and is of bonafide nature.

4
Importance of the summer training report:

Clinical education programs for law students have been of great advantage to them. The
objective of such programs is to provide an understanding of the human, social and policy
contexts of law and legal practice. This objective is met through the Legal Internship.
Internships fulfil an important component of both academic and practical education in law.
The integration of professional experience into the learning process is highly effective in
developing the understanding of law in action, as you are able to observe and perceive the
relevance and application of theory to practice. Consequently, the program is not simply
‘work experience’ but a significant educational experience.

In a workplace setting one will be exposed to the reality of the practice of law in all its
dimensions –

• The integration of different areas of law, policy issues;

• The application and development of skills to the analysis and resolution of client
concerns;

• Ethical responses to situations which arise unexpectedly and spontaneously;

• Issues of professional responsibility including responsibility to clients and case

management;

• The operations of the government and court system in the legal process.

6
INDEX

S . Particulars PAGE NO.

no
.
1. Symphony Ltd V. Bajaj Plastic and Co. 8-9
2. Bhasin Motors V. Punjab and Sind Bank 10-12
3. Ascot Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. V. 12-14
Housing urban Development
Corporation
4. Premwati V. Sh. Vinay Rathi 14-16
5. Tanya Aircon V. M/S Rudra Buildwell 16-19
Project Pvt. Ltd.
6. M/S Ahluwalia Contract Pvt. Ltd. V. M/ 20-21
S MGF Developers
7. Sudha Bisht V. S.K. Thaper 21-23
8. State V. Vinod Sharma 23-24
9. Delhi Development V. DLF Ltd. 24-26

7
 CASE LAW - 1

In the court of Mrs. Rekha Dhakkar,

Debt recovery Tribunal,
At Patel Chowk, New Delhi
DATE: 02/08/2021

IN THE MATTER OF:-

Symphony Ltd. ….. Plaintiff

Versus

Bajaj Plastic & Ors ….. Defendant

Subject Matter: - Suit u/s 22 of the Designs act, 2002

Application under order IX Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908

Brief Facts:

1. The plaintiff is a public Ltd. Company listed at the National Stock exchange of India
Ltd. And incorporated under the companies act, 1956

2. The defendants are illegally and without any permission or authority, manufacturing ,
selling and marketing air coolers, that are the unauthorised replicas and imitations of
the registered designs of the models of the Plaintiff, namely STORM 70 and JUMBO,

8
 thereby committing piracy of the Plaintiff’s registered designs and infringing on the
rights of the designs of the Plaintiff as their own.

3. Defendant No.1 is manufacturing and selling air coolers that are unauthorised replicas
and imitations of the Plaintiff’s registered design of the models “Storm 70”thereby-
committing piracy of the Plaintiff’s registered designs and infringing the right of the
Plaintiff by passing off the design of the plaintiff as its own.

4. Plaintiff further submits that the defendants being fully aware of the excellent
reputation and goodwill enjoyed by the plaintiff and their brand, have acted with
malafide intent to unfairly benefit by passing off and marketing their products in the
exact fraudulent imitation of design, shape and configuration as that of the plaintiff’s
registered product designs thereby, misleading and defrauding the consumer.

Observation:

The defendant after a no. of summons did not show up before the Tribunal and was
declared to be ex-parte. The defendant humbly submitted that the summons were
delivered to him on the wrong address and therefore under order IX Rule 13 prayed to
set aside the order of ex-parte.

The defendant has humbly submitted the application under Order IX Rule 13 to set
aside the order of ex-parte.

I was able to learn about the laws of piracy and the designs act 2002, along with the
provisions of order 9 of the Civil Procedure Code.

9
 CASE LAW - 2

In the Court Of Justice Ranjit Singh,

Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal,
New Delhi
DATE:05/08/2021

IN THE MATTER OF:-

Bhasin Motors ….. Appellant

Versus

Punjab &Sind Bank & Anr ….. Respondent

Subject Matter: - Suit under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act,2002

Brief facts:

1. The appellant company is a reputed company which has been in the automobile
business over a few decades. The appellant inter-alia has the dealer ships/service
centers of the automobile manufacturers:

i) Mahindra & Mahindra

10
 ii) Volkswagen

2. Necessarily for such business the appellant would require ongoing banking facilities
in the nature of working capital requirements inter alia towards procurement of
vehicles, spare parts etc and also as required by Mahindra & Mahindra and
Volkswagen. Punjab & Sind Bank guarantees towards procurement of vehicles and
spare parts to cover transit period.

3. As alleged by the bank in its notice dates 13th January 2020 issued under section 13(2)
of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest act, 2002 (SARFAESI)

4. Punjab & Sind Bank sanctioned and allowed-

➢ Cash credit limit of Rs 10 crores

➢ Bank Guarantee limit of Rs 7 crores

5. Bank issued notice u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 for the recovery of its loan
amount. But the appellant company submitted that they are willing to pay the entire
principal amount along with the contractual amount @ 14.25 % but not the interest
charged by them which is at a very high rate i.e. @ 28% per annum

Observation:

I learned about the provisions of section 13(2) SARFAESI Act, 2002.

Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act talks about the enforcement of security interest.

And sec 13(2), one of the most important section for any borrower and creditor these days
states that,

11
 Where any borrower, who is under a liability to a secured creditor under a security
agreement, makes any default in repayment of secured debt or any instalment thereof,
and his account in respect of such debt is classified by the secured creditor as non-
performing asset, then, the secured creditor may require the borrower by notice in
writing to discharge in full his liabilities to the secured creditor within sixty days from
the date of notice failing

NDOF: 16/9/2021

CASE LAW - 3

In the Hon’ble Court Of Justice Yogesh Khanna

High Court of Delhi
At New Delhi
DATE:07/08/2021
IN THE MATTER OF:-

Ascot hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. ...appellants

Versus

Housing Urban Development Corporation …respondents

Subject matter: Suit for the recovery of Rs. 28,90,74,352

Suit under Order VI Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code

Brief Facts:
1. The appellant, Ascot Hotels & Resorts Ltd. operates projects in Real Estate,
Hospitality, Retail and Wayside Amenities.

12
 2. For its upcoming project of Housing Corporation in Greater Noida, the appellant
company required funds. The estimated amount required at the beginning was Rs.
1,24,60,00,000/-
3. They approached the respondent company for providing them with the funds.
HUDCO, the respondent company agreed to invest Rs.80,00,00,000 in the appellant
company. And the rest amount was funded by other promoters.

Project Cost 1,24,60,00,000

HUDCO 80,00,00,000
Promoters 44,60,00,000

4. But the respondent company only released Rs. 62,38,00,00/-

5. Also, the respondent Company, had a condition and made it very clear that the project
should be completed within 18 months. But due to the various factors like elections,
change in the ruling party, development of the roads etc the project couldn’t be
completed in the given time period.
6. And therefore the respondent company issued a notice to the appellant company on
11th Feb 2019 under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI for the recovery of Rs.
69,53,59,568/-

Principal amount 57,32,76,782

Simple Interest 10,19,35,583
Compound Interest 1,15,13,504
Total amount to be paid 69,53,59,568

7. But the appellant company due to short funds could only pay 40,62,85,216 on 31st
march 2019.
8. And therefore the respondent company sued the appellant company for the recovery
of Rs. 28,90,74,352/-
9. The Debt Recovery Tribunal and the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal held for the
auctioning of the Appellant’s property on 21st July 2020.

13
 10. By that time appellant through various financial aid institutions had arrange the
money, and therefore they moved to the Hon’ble High Court for amendment in their
prayer under Order VI Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code to settle the matter
without the auctioning of their property. Also the appellant company agreed to pay the
simple along with the compounded interest at the rate fixed by the court.

Observation:
During this case I learned that Order VI, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code consists
of three parts:
1) The court at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to amend his
pleadings
2) Amendment shall be made for the purpose of determining the real controversies
raised between the parties.
3) The basic structure of the suit shall not be changed.

NDOH: - 08/10/2021

CASE LAW – 4

In the Hon’ble Court Of Justice Manmohan

High Court of Delhi
At New Delhi
DATE:10/08/2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

PREMWATI … appellant
Versus

1. SH. VINAY RATHI , DIRECTOR OF RATHI STEELS

14
2. SH. ANURAG RATHI, DIRECTOR OF RATHI STEELS

3. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

4. EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION … respondent

Subject matter: Suit filed under article 65 of Limitation Act 1963 read with section 5 of
Specific Relief Act.

CS no. 336/2013

Brief Facts:

1. In this case it was held that the appellant owned a plot near Shahdara, Delhi.
Appellant used to visit her plot from time to time, and when she last visited the plot
on 26/07/2020, she saw that the boundary wall of the plot was demolished. On
05/10/2020 appellant filed a case.

2. In this case it was seen that the respondents no. 1 & 2 were the directors of the Rathi
steels Ltd., the other two respondents i.e. respondents no. 3 DDA (through Mr. Vikas
Sadan Vice chairman of DDA) & respondent no. 4 East Delhi Municipal Corporation.

3. All the respondents were innocent on their part as they did their work properly
without any partiality. But on the hearing it came to knowledge that the directors of
Rathi steels had the adjoining plot and they had already planted their industry near
the appellants plot. Thus all the parties were directed to show all the evidences which
makes their part correct.

Observation:-

Appellant was unable to show any hard evidences against the involvements of the
respondents no. 4. Appellant does not have any documents for the purchase of the property,

15
no witnesses, and even no evidences also, which proves the involvement of respondents in
the demolition of the structure. Court directed the appellant to show the purchase documents
and agreement papers also along with the bank account transaction of purchasing of that plot.

NDOH: - 10.09.2021

CASE LAW-5

Before the Hon’ble Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum

Sheikh Sarai

New Delhi

DATE:13/08/2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

TANYA

AIRCON ...……Complainant

Versus

M/s RUDRA BUILDWELL PROJECT PVT. ……. Opposite parties

LTD. & ORS.

Subject Matter: complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act

Brief facts:-

16
1. It is stated herein that the opposite parties issued advertisement, public
announcements and publication at large in order to lure huge investments for
the company, by misrepresenting the individuals, that the company is in the
process of developing a project in Greater Noida (west) Uttar Pradesh. Further
the opposite parties misrepresented the complainant that the said project will
be the stagnant growth in the future.

2. The opposite parties approached the complainant to buy a flat in the said
project. That based on the false and misrepresented assurances of the opposite
parties, the complainant agreed to purchase a flat in the said project. It is
further submitted that the opposite parties promised to sign an agreement in
regard to the said flat after paying the sum of Rs 3,00,000/- as pre-booking
amount.

3. That the complainant believing on the false and uncorroborated assurances of

the opposite parties paid an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/-(Rupees Three Lacs only)
as pre-booking amount for flat bearing no. “B 2-902” measuring about 1015
Sq. feet Super Area (approx.) in place Heights GH-02 B, Sector-1, Greater
Noida (West) U.P. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant was
assured that the agreement will be signed and the possession of the flat would
be handed over within 30 months after receiving the full and final payment.

4. the complainant paid a registration/ pre-booking amount of Rs. 3,00,000/-

(Rupees Three Lacs only) vide online payment inward in ref. no. M77366
dated 21.09.2019 transfer from Punjab National Bank, as further advance
towards registration of the said flat in question which was duly acknowledged
vide receipt no. 1805 dated 04.10.2019. It is further submitted that after

17
 making the several requests by the complainant in regard to the said flat.
Further the opposite parties never provided any document of regarding the flat
nor produced any proof of stagnant growth of the project.

5. It is stated herein that despite of making several request by the complainant

regarding documentation, progress report and the time when the possession of
flat will be given the opposite parties completely refused and kept the
complainant in the dark.

6. The complainant after waiting for a long prolong period, was informed by the
opposite parties that the said project has been stopped for indefinite time and
therefore the opposite parties offered the complainant to cancel the flat
booking and agreed to refund the full amount paid by the complainant. the
opposite parties are jointly and severally liable for the harassment, loss, agony,
both mental and physical caused to the complainant with such degraded act of
the opposite parties.

7. The opposite parties cheated the complainant and breached the trust when the
opposite party no.2 with the malafide intentions of cheating duped us for
buying a flat in the said project. That by the said act the opposite parties has
caused wrongful gain to the opposite parties and wrongful loss to the
complainant, for which the opposite parties are liable to the prosecuted for
cheating, criminal breach of trust, criminal misappropriation and wrongful loss
to the complainant which is punishable under the provisions of the Indian
Penal Code. Further by admitting the amounts as mentioned above but later on
refuse to pay the same and not handing over the possession of the flat;
amounted forgery for the purpose of cheating punishable u/s 468 & 471 of
IPC.

18
Observation:-

It was held that the opposite parties are required to pay a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees
Three Lacs only) towards recovery of the amount paid to the opposite parties along with
interests @ 24% along with Rs 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) without any
delay.

19
CASE LAW - 6 In the Hon’ble Court Of Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva
High Court of Delhi
At New Delhi
DATE:18/08/2021

IN THE MATTER OF:-

M/s Ahluwalia Contracts (India) Pvt. Ltd ……..Petitioner

Versus

M/s MGF Developments Ltd. ……Respondent

Subject matter: Application under section 151 CPC for appropriate direction on behalf of
the petitioner.

Brief Facts :-

1. That the present petition is filed by the petitioner for an order that the respondent
company be wind up by this Hon’ble Court under the provisions of the Companies
Act, 1956.

2. As per books of the account of the petitioner, the total outstanding dues against the
works done in terms of the contracts as entered in between the parties and the
respondent is shown as Rs. 15,27,79,696/- (Rupees Fifteen crores Twenty Seven Lacs
Seventy Nine thousand Six hundred and Ninety Six only).

3. It is submitted that the vide order dated May 27, 2020-

“The Managing Director of the Respondent is directed to file Balance of Sheet

and Loss account for the last three years along with an affidavit in support
thereof”

20
 4. The said order is not complied by the respondent.

5. It is submitted herein that the respondent has to comply the order with direction in
respect of filing of the affidavit.

Observation:

In terms of the said order the respondent were mandatorily directed to file the balance of
sheet and the profit and loss account for the last three years along with an affidavit.

NDOH:

11/10/2021

CASE LAW-7

In the court of Mr. Akash Jain, Additional Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate
Patiala House, New Delhi
DATE:23/08/2021

IN THE MATTER OF:-

SUDHA BISHT …complainant

VERSUS

S.K. THAPER … accused

Subject Matter: complaint under section 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code,1860.

21
Brief Facts:-

1. That the complainant is the resident of s/1007 of Ghaziabad sector 5 booked a plot in
the scheme of the builder, the plot booked was of 200sq. yards. The complainant was
also given the token money for booking the plot as amount of Rs. 5, 00, 000/- on
04/07/2019.

2. That at the time of booking the builder promised to give the plot in the 7 or 8 months
from the date of booking. The plot and the project was of Haridwar, Uttarakhand but
was subject to the jurisdiction of the New Delhi.

3. But after waiting the long time of one and half years the plaintiff didn’t get the plot,
although they received a letter of confirmation of the payment but after a long time.

4. That plaintiff then along with her husband had gone to meet the builder personally,
but when they reached the official of the builder they were asked not to come back
here again.

5. That after going through this humiliation the plaintiff lodge an FIR no. as 275/11 in
police station under the section of cheating, criminal conspiracy and other offences
related to property.

6. The S.K. Thaper was arrested and after that release on bail.

22
Observation:-

I have come to know about the provision of bail and arrest as stated in the Code Of Criminal
Procedure,1973

NDOH:- 5/10/2021

CASE LAW -8

In the court of Mr. Lokesh Kumar Sharma, Additional Sessions

Judge
Dwarka Court, New Delhi
DATE:26/08/2021

IN THE MATTER OF

STATE …complainant

VERSUS

VINOD SHARMA …accused

Subject Matter:- complaint under section 498A of Indian Penal Code,1860.

Brief Facts:

1. That the marriage between the revisionist and respondent no. 1 was solemnised on
15/02/2012. They both lived together and out of their wedlock a minor child namely
baby Prophi was born to them on 11/07/2013. During the period, the revisionist lived
with the respondent no. 1. She committed all sorts of acts of cruelty, harassment,
torture and humiliation.

23
 2. That the F.I.R was lodged on 17/05/2010 in crime (women) cell. F.I.R no. as 73/10
was filed u/s 498A /406/34 by Pooja wife of the accused against the family also.

3. That the Pooja also filed a petition for divorce u/s 13(1)(a) of Hindu marriage Act,
against the revisionist on 24/08/2015.

4. That the Pooja have put the false allegation on Vinod Sharma and his family u/s
468A/406/34 as accused never done any cruelty act on Pooja, whereas she was
careless and egoist person, she never took care of his parents and use to give answers
in founding way.

5. That the Pooja with filing the false F.I.R abuses the procedure and law as well wasted
the time of court.

Observation:-

On 13/08/2021 that matter was fixed before the hon'ble court for hearing on this day P.P was
absent and Pooja was also not present in person, summon was issued for here on the next date
of 15/09/2021.

I have learned about the provision of section 498A & 34 of IPC.

NDOH:- 15/09/2021

24
CASE LAW-9

In the Hon’ble Court Of Justice Amit Bansal

High Court of Delhi
At New Delhi
DATE:31/08/2021

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY …appellant

VERSUS

DLF Ltd. …respondent

Subject Matter: Suit filed u/s section 151 of CPC

Brief Facts:

1. In 2017 it was held that DDA (Delhi development authority) files a suit against DLF
ltd. for illegal construction on one of the sites of the DDA. The appellant issues
various legal notices to the respondent about the illegal construction they were doing
but the respondents replies by letting the appellant know that they have got the
permission to complete the construction.

2. In May 2017 appellant investigates on its part about the permissions for such
construction in non development zone and comes to know that the construction was
not allowed upto such an extent, therefore the appellant again in June 2017 sends a
legal notice along with its representative who informs the respondents about the
clearances of certificates and NDZ.

25
 3. Respondent denies to the legal notice by saying that they were having all the
permissions for the construction from the government of Delhi.

4. Appellant in July 2017 files a suit against the DLF ltd. U/s 151 CPC. The valuation of
case is of Rs.900 crores. Respondent in his written statement said that all the claims
put on them by the Appellant were null and wrong as no such illegal construction has
been done on their part. Respondents were also able to show the court all the
evidences and agreements which states that there construction was not illegal and
fully authorised by the Delhi Government.

5. Appellant was not able to prove its point and also fails to show the relevant evidences
in the court which could make the respondent liable for the wrongful acts. It also
came into knowledge that the appellant had done some of the demolishing activities
in the respondent’s property which lead to a lot of loss for the respondent

6. Thus respondent claims Rs.900 crores from the appellant for demolishing their
structure.

7. Both the parties referred to mediation and a settlement has been done among them as
appellant accepts its mistakes and is ready for mediation, an agreement on
25/08/2021 has been done which is duly signed by the parties, their council and the
mediators about the settlement amount for Rs. 675.81 crores which must be paid by
the appellant. Mr. Arya, the director, signs for all the acts done by the appellant.

Observation:-

Settlement of Rs. 675.81 crores paid by the appellant and the respondent agrees to receive the
whole amount in full and final settlement for all the claims filed in respect of suit property.

26
 Conclusion:
The Legal Internship Program is designed to teach students how to be good lawyers.

The objectives are to:

• expose you to the law in operation in contexts where you will come to perceive aspects of
law which cannot be learned from reading or hearing about it

• allow you to perceive ways in which the formal learning you acquire at University may be
applied in practice and therefore to develop an appreciation of the practical dimensions of
legal principles

• enable you to relate the different areas of legal practice to the importance of developing the
skills of legal research, communication, drafting, practice management and problem solving

• enable you to observe and reflect upon the values, ethical standards and conduct of the legal
profession in practice and to develop your own attitudes of professional responsibility.

At the end of the internship, I was able to appreciate some of the practical aspects and social
dimensions of legal problems and relate the application of different areas of legal principle to
the application of the different skills of research, communication, and practice that different
types of legal work require. An additional benefit of the program is that it provides you with
an opportunity to observe the way in which law operates in a practical life, and so may assist
in making future career choices.

27