List New2.asp

TA No.
26/2015
Ravinder Singh Tanwar
Vs.
Vivek Mehta & Anr.
15.5.2015
Present: Sh. Rajpal Singh, counsel for the applicant.
Sh. Raghav Sharma, counsel for the nonapplicant No. 1.
Ld. counsel for the applicant has informed that
order on the application has been passed by the court
of Sh. Deepak Sehrawat, Ld. ACJ, S/W.
Since the order on application under order 12
Rule 6 CPC has already been passed by Ld. ACJ, S/W,
the application is not being pressed by the counsel for
the
applicant. As such, no order is required to be
passed.
Transfer application be consigned to record
room.
(Ravinder Kaur)
District & Sessions Judge:
South West District
Dwarka Courts/Delhi/15.5.2015(ch)
CR No. 12/2015
S.P.Jain & Anr.
Vs.
BBC Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd.
15.5.2015
Present: None for the petitioner.
Sh. Sanjay Madan, counsel for the respondent.
Matter has been called twice however, none
has appeared on behalf of the
petitioner.
As such,
present revision petition is dismissed in default.

Trial court record be sent back along with the
copy of this order with directions to proceed with the
matter as per law.
Revision file be consigned to record room.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
CA No. 101/2014
State Vs. Vikram Kadiyan
15.5.2015
Present: Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta, Ld. Chief Prosecutor,
on behalf of the State.
Court notice issued to the respondent received
back
unserved.
respondent
IO
has
submitted
report
that
has been convicted in case FIR No.
92/2013, U/S 454/380/411 IPC of PS Civil Line, Karnal

Haryana and
he is presently lodged at Karnal Jail,
Haryana.
Issue production warrant of the respondent for
1.6.2015.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
CR No. 35/2015
Sai Cargo Movers & Anr. Vs. Balaji Cargo
15.5.2015
Present: Sh.
Gurvinder
Singh,
counsel
for
the
petitioner.
Petitioner No. 2 in person and on behalf of
petitioner No. 1 company.
Respondent in person along with counsel
Sh. Jogender Kumar.
Arguments heard.
Put up for order at 4.00 pm.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
PPA No. 2/2010

Sunil Dutt Vs. Union of India & Anr.
15.5.2015
Present: Appellant in person.
Sh. Mayank Soni, Advocate proxy for Sh. S.C
Singhal, counsel for the appellant.
Havaldar Manoj Kumar, from Station HQ,
Delhi Cantt is present on behalf of the
respondent.
Adjournment is sought on behalf of the parties
as their counsel are not available today.
The matter is one of the 20 oldest cases
pending in this court. No ground is made out for
adjournment however, in the interest of justice, matter
is adjourned to 21.5.2015 for arguments, by way of last
and final opportunity,
subject to cost of Rs. 2,000/-
each, to be deposited by both the parties with DLSA.

Further it is made clear that
shall
be
granted
for
no further opportunity
arguments
on
any
ground
whatsoever.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
CA No. 28/2013
Jagbir Singh Vs. Satish Kumar
15.5.2015
Present:
Smt. Beena, wife of appellant in person.
Respondent Satish Kumar in person with counsel
Sh. M.S Kaushik.
Today wife of the appellant has made payment
of
Rs. 80,000/- to the respondent.

In token of receipt of Rs. 80,000/- signature of
respondent is taken on the order sheet.
Wife of the appellant
has requested for some more
time for making payment of remaining amount.

Counsel for the respondent
petitioner
has insisted
be also directed to pay some interest
that
on delayed
payment.
This matter be discussed
in the presence
of the
counsel of the appellant, on the next date of hearing.

Put up for payment of entire balance amount,
on
25.5.2015. Appellant is directed to appear in person on the next

date. Operation of order dated 13.2.2015, regarding issuance of
NBW against the appellant is suspended till next date of hearing.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
Contempt Appl. No. 1/2014

Satish Kumar Vs. Jagbir Singh
15.5.2015
Present: Applicant in person with counsel Sh. M.S.
Kaushik.
Respondent absent. Smt. Beena wife of
respondent is present.
Put up on 25.5.2015 along with CA No.
28/2013, titled Jagbir Singh Vs. Satish Kumar.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
CR No. 51/2015
Mohan Bharti Vs. State
15.5.2015
Present: None for the petitioner.
Be awaited
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
(1.10 pm)
Present
None for the petitioner.

Case called twice.
Since, none has appeared on behalf of the
petitioner despite repeated calls,
present revision
petition is dismissed in default.

File be consigned to record room.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 125/2014

Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd.
Vs.
Apex Encon Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit
Chauhan, Adv. proxy for Sh. Anurag
Jain, counsel for the respondent company.

Reply to arbitration petition filed on behalf of the
Respondent. Copy supplied.
Sh. Tarun Sharma, AR has submitted that counsel
for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks
adjournment. It is further submitted that they were under

impression that matter is fixed today for filing of reply.
Perusal of record shows that today matter is fixed
for filing of reply as well as for arguments. No
ground is
made out for adjournment however, in the interest of justice,

matter is adjourned to 25.5.2015 for arguments, subject to
cost of Rs. 500/-, to be deposited by
the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
Dwarka Courts/Delhi/15.5.2015 (ch)
ARBT No. 126/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 127/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 128/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 129/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 130/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 131/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 132/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 133/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 134/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 135/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 136/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 137/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 138/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 139/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 140/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
ARBT No. 141/2014

Vs.
15.5.2015
Present:
Sh.
Tarun
Sharma,
AR
of
the
petitioner
company.
Sh. Amit

Respondent. Copy suppl ied.
for
the
petitioner
has
not
come
today
and
seeks

ground is

the petitioner
with
DLSA.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
MCDA No. 9/2012

Pushpa Devi Vs. MCD & Anr.
15.5.2015
File taken up today on receipt of directions from
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, vide order dated 13.4.2015,
to
dispose off the present appeal within 12 weeks.

The Ahlmad has reported that this order has been
communicated to this court on 13.5.2015, i.e. after lapse of four
weeks.
Matter is already fixed for arguments for 13.7.2015.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
FIR No. 982/2007

PS Dabri
State Vs. Sachin @ Suraj & ors.
15.5.2015
File taken up in view of the directions of Hon'ble
High Court of Delhi dated 21.4.2015, for initiating the
proceedings u/s 82 & 83 Cr.P.C against respondent No. 2
Sher Singh @ Sheru S/o Bheem Singh, R/o Mohalla Chidya
Khana, Gate No. 2, PS Sachivalaya, District Patna, Bihar.
Issue
process
u/s
82
Cr.P.C
against
the
respondent No. 2 referred above, as per the proforma given

in form No. 4 Second Schedule
concerned SHO, with directions
i.e.
special
messenger,
not
of Cr.P.C, through
to send the same by hand

below
the
rank
of
Head
Constable, returnable on or before 1.7.2015.

Further, SHO
is directed to get the process u/s
82 Cr.P.C served by way of publication, in Local newspaper

i.e. Dainik Jagran Patna Edition and National Newspaper
i.e. Hindi Daily Hindustan.
Copy of this order be sent to SHO Concerned for
compliance.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
Dwarka Courts/Delhi/15.5.2015
SC 33/14
FIR No. 336/14
PS Dabri
State Vs.Sushant Kumar
PW-10
Ct. Sukhdev recalled for further examination

in chief deferred on 1.4.2015.
OnSA
I can identify the knife as the knife was a
vegetable cutting knife and its total length is approximately
12 inches and shape of the blade is straight having pointed
edge on beginning.
accused.
I can also identify the T Shirt of the
However, I do not remember its colour.
I can
identify the black colour motorcycle bearing no.DL7S BC

1558 if shown to me.
At this stage MHC (M) has produced parcel no.3
sealed with the seal of court, seal intact, and the same is
opened and a vegetable cutting knife is taken out from the
pullanda and same is shown to the witness who identifies the
same. Same is already Ex.P.1.
Another pullanda brought by MHC (M) sealed
with the seal of KC, seal intact and the same is opened and a
white colour blood stained T Shirt is taken out and is shown
to the witness who identifies the same which was seized by
the IO and belongs to the accused. Same is Ex.P.2.
At this stage witness has seen the motorcycle
bearing no. DL7S BC 1558 brought by MHC (M) parked in
the court premises and stated it is the same which was
seized by the IO at the spot. Same is now Ex.P.3.
Xxxxxxx by Shri Subhash Dixit, Ld. counsel for the
accused, from DLSA.
DD no.40A was received in the police station at
about 8.45 pm and immediately we left the police station. I

had not made any departure entry and IO might have made
the same. I along with IO reached at the spot within 15-20
minutes.
At the spot Sunil, brother of injured was found
present.
There were 25-30 public persons present at the
spot.
IO had requested 3-4 public persons to join the
investigation. One or two females were joined in the

investigation.
Their statements were recorded by the IO.
They had informed the IO about the incident. However I do

not remember their names.
Some writing work was being done by the IO
before he left for the hospital but I do not know what was
written by him. Sunil Kumar the brother of the injured had
informed the IO that injured was removed to Bhagat
Chandra Hospital.
IO had left the spot after 15 -20 minutes of our
reaching the spot.
The knife which was handed over by
Sunil Kumar to the IO was handed over to me before he left

for the hospital.
It was in unsealed condition. Two beat
constables had also arrived at the spot while IO was leaving

for the hospital.
IO had returned to the spot at about 10.30 pm.
SHO had arrived at the sport before return of IO.
Crime Team had reached the
spot after the arrival of IO
from hospital.
In my presence IO had recorded the statement of
Sunil Kumar only.
The personal search memo, seizure memo of the
knife, seizure memo of motorcycle and rukka was prepared
by the IO in my presence.
In answer to leading question by Ld. CPP : the arrest

memo of the accused was also prepared by the IO, in my
presence.
IO had obtained my signature on arrest memo,
personal search memo and seizure memos.
I had signed
these documents after I returned to the spot along with copy

of FIR.
From the personal search of the accused one
purse containing ATM cards and some currency was
recovered.
The sketch of the knife was also prepared by the
IO in my presence, at the spot. I do not remember if IO had
obtained my signature thereon. I do not remember if IO had
prepared any other document at the spot.
The accused was arrested around 1.30 am.
It is correct that knife like Ex.P.1 is easily
available in the market .
It is wrong to suggest that Knife
Ex.P.1 was planted upon the accused. Voln. It was in the

hand of accused when we reached the spot.
It is incorrect
to suggest that I had not joined the investigation and for this
reason I could not tell the colour of the T shirt worn by the
accused when we saw him at the spot. IO had seized the T
shirt of the accused in my presence at the spot but I do not
remember the time when IO seized the same. It is incorrect
to suggest that T shirt Ex.P.2 was planted upon the accused.
I remained associated with the investigation of
this case till the accused was produced in the court on
10.5.2014.
The statements of witnesses other than Sunil
were also recorded in my presence at the spot before 5.30

am. It is wrong to suggest that in connivance with police the
family members of injured falsely implicated the accused in

this case.
RO & AC
(Ravinder Kaur)
District & Sessions Judge
South West District
SC 15/14
FIR No. 203/11
PS Kapashera
State Vs. Gaurav @ Mini @ Mita & Ors.
PW-5
OnSA
Ranjit Kumar Mahto S/o Shri Suraj Mal

Mahto, Aged : 36 years R/o Jhuggi no.8/35,
Kirti Nagar, New Delhi (Previously resided at
Sector 21, Gurgaon, Saya Tour & Travels).
On 23.11.2011 I was driving Innova HR 55 NT
7249 of Saya Tours & Travels. At about 9.30 pm I dropped

the staff of Saya Tours & Travels at Shahdara and was
returning to Gurgaon. When I reached Andheria Mor, I saw
three boys standing at Andheria Mor bus stand. They gave
hand to stop the vehicle. I stopped the vehicle to pick them
up as passengers.
They asked me if I would go to
Mahipalpur. I replied in the affirmative. One of those boys

sat in the front by the side of driver seat and remaining two
at the back seat. Thereafter I started moving the vehicle and
reached Mahipalpur.
proceed further.
They asked me as to where I would
I told them that I would to Kapashera.
They asked me to drop them also at Kapashera.
When I
reached behind the police station Kapashera, the boy who

was sitting in front told the boys sitting behind Laga de.
On his saying this one of the boys sitting behind me had put
pistol on my forehead and the person who was sitting in
front asked me to stop the vehicle. I become perplexed so I
stopped the vehicle. They asked me to sit at the back seat
but I told them to take away the vehicle and in the meantime
the two boys who were sitting on the back seat had pulled
me back from the gap between the front two seats and made
me sit in between the two. The boy who was sitting in the
front sat on the driving seat the started driving.
The boy
who was sitting on my right side kept the pistol on my waist.

They car was driven towards Dwarka via under pass
and
then from the red light they took right U turn and drove
towards Vasant Kunj. From there it was driven towards
Kapashera. When we had reached Rangpuri one boy came
from behind on motorcycle.
The boys who were sitting in
Innova were talking with someone and were calling someone

as Chacha and asked him to come that side by telling him
that they were at Vasant Kunj. They boy who came on the
motorcycle started riding in front of Innova and sometimes
on its side.
Then again the vehicle was taken towards
Dwarka Sector 27. There I was asked by the boys in Innova

to get down. While I was in the process of getting down I
was hit with spanner (paana) and with the butt of the pistol,
three four time by one of the two boys who were sitting
along with me at the back seat. Since I had heard those boys
that they would give me beating till I become unconscious so
I kept my both the hands and sat down and thereafter those
boys started jumping on my body. After jumping five seven
times and I pretended that I was unconscious they left me
there while saying ab ye subah tak hilega bhi nahi and
thereafter two boys drove away Innova and two boys left on
motorcycle. Thereafter I got up and I ran away and walked
to jungle where it was too dark. While I was sitting in the
vehicle I was beaten up by the boys and was also made to lie
on their feet. My mobile phone, purse containing ID card,
driving licence and some money i.e. around Rs.400/- were
removed by the person who was sitting on my left side. The
purse was of black colour.
Mobile phone was of Nokia
1208.
After crossing the jungle I reached main road and
stopped one two wheeler scooter and informed him about
the incident and also told him to inform my employer. From
his mobile phone he informed my employer about the
incident.
My employer reached that place, informed the
police and police reached there.
I was removed to some
hospital at Najafgarh where I was bandaged and referred to

Jaffarpur Hospital. However I was not taken to Jaffarpur
Hospital by my employer. Instead he called his brother on
telephone to reach there where we were present but his
brother did not turn up. My employer namely Joginder was
tracking the movement of Innova vehicle on GPS and then
we proceeded towards Sonipat the directions shown on the
GPS. As per the location shown on GPS the vehicle was
parked at village Rasoi, Sonipat.
At Sonipat there were
12-13 Gypsies of 100 number (PCR). The innova was found

parked there and there were four persons in the same but
on seeing the police they all escaped. The police had seized
the said vehicle. The vehicle was then brought back to PS
Kapashera.
Police had recorded my statement on 24.11.2011
where my employer had reached after the rider of two
wheeler scooter had informed him of my presence there. I
had signed my said statement.
I identify my signature
thereon and the same is now Ex.PW5/A.
In answer to court question : After my said

statement was recorded I was proceeded towards Sonipat
with my employer, in esteem car whereas police had
accompanied us in Xylo.
I can identify all the four boys
involved in the incident.

The witness has seen three accused namely
Hitesh, Himanshu and Uttam Rana, present in court.
(Accused Gaurav is exempted from appearnace through his
counsel, Shri Jai Singh Yadav).
The witness has pointed out towards accused
Hitesh that he was on the motorcycle and has pointed out
towards accused Himanshu and Uttam Rana as the two boys
who had pulled him to the back seat of Innova.
(further examination in chief is deferred for want of accused

Gaurav @ Mini)
RO & AC
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
IN THE COURT OF MS RAVINDER KAUR,

DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE : SOUTH WEST
DISTRICT DWARKA COURTS : NEW DELHI.
FIR No.435/13
PS Dabri
State Vs. Rahul & Ors.
CHARGE
I, Ravinder Kaur, District & Sessions Judge, South
West District, Dwarka, New Delhi do hereby charge you
Rahul S/o Sh
Narender Pal Singh
(2) Pradeep S/o Shri
Bunny Singh (3) Sunil @ Bilota S/o Heera Lal Shaky and (4)
Anand @ Nanhe S/o Shri Narender Pal Singh as under :That,
on
5.8.2013 at about 11.15 pm at Budh
Bazar Chowk gali No.15, Rajapuri, New Delhi, within the

jurisdiction of PS
Dabri,
you all the accused persons in
furtherance of common intention of you all gave beatings to

Avdesh S/o Shri Ram Niwas and you accused Rahul caused
number of stab injuries to the complainant
with such
intention and knowledge and under such circumstances that,

if by that act you had caused the death of complainant,
Avdesh, you would have been guilty of murder and thereby
committed an offence punishable u/s 307/34 IPC and within
my cognizance. And I hereby direct you that you be tried for
aforesaid offence by this court.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
-2Certified that charge has been read over and

explained to the accused in vernacular and
accused are
questioned as under:Q
Have you heard the charge and understood the

same ?
Yes.
Q.
Do you plead guilty or claim trial?
I plead not guilty and claim trial.
RO&AC
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
SC 33/14
FIR No. 336/14
PS Dabri
State Vs.Sushant Kumar
15.05.2015
Present: Shri Anil Kumar Gupta, Ld. Chief Prosecutor on
behalf of the State.
Accused Sushant produced from the JC.
Shri Subhash Dixit, Ld. counsel for the accused,
from DLSA.
Further examination in chief & cross examination
of PW-10 Ct. Sukhdev recorded.
IO SI KC Meena is absent despite service. Issue
B/W in the sum of Rs.1000/- against him. B/W be executed
through SHO, PS Dabri.
Put up on 22.5.2015 for entire prosecution
evidence.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
Dwarka Courts/Delhi/15.05.2015 (RA)
SC 02/2015
FIR No.435/13
PS Dabri
State Vs. Rahul & Ors.
15.05.2015
Present: Shri Anil Kumar Gupta, Ld. Chief Prosecutor on
behalf of the State.
Accused Rahul is present on bail.
Accused Pradeep is present on bail.
Accused Sunil @ Bilota is present on bail.
Accused Anand @ Nanhe is present on bail.
Shri B.D.Pandey, Ld. counsel for all the accused
persons.
Arguments heard on the point of charge.
I have perused the charge Sheet and the relevant
record. Prima facie case is made out under Section 307/34
IPC against the accused persons.
Ld. counsel for the
accused persons have also conceded that charge is made out

against the accused persons under Section 307/34 IPC.
Charge under Section 307/34 IPC is framed
separately, to which accused
persons have pleaded not
guilty and claimed trial.

To come up on 1.6.2015 and 2.6.2015 for
prosecution evidence.
PWs mentioned at S.L No. 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8 be
summoned for 1.6.2015.
Remaining witnesses be summoned for 2.6.2015.
Summons be also issued to
MHC(M) to produce the case
property on both the dates. IO be present on both the dates.

(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
TA No.23/2015
Ram Rattan & Anr. Vs. Dayal Singh & Ors.
15.05.2015
Present: Shri N.C.Sharma, Ld. counsel for the applicants.
Shri N.K.Aggarwal, Ld. counsel for the non
applicants with non applicants dayal Singh &
Shashi Bhushan.
Reply filed. Copy supplied.
Arguments heard.
Put up for orders on 18.5.2015.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
SC 15/14
FIR No. 203/11
PS Kapashera
State Vs. Gaurav @ Mini @ Mita & Ors.
15.05.2015
Present:
Shri Anil Kumar Gupta, Ld. Chief Prosecutor on
behalf of
the State.
Accused Hitesh @ Handa is present on bail.
Accused Himanshu @ Pinku is present on bail.
Accused Uttam Rana is present on bail.
Accused Gaurav @ Mini is absent.
Shri Jai Singh Yadav, Ld. counsel for accused persons
Himanshu, Uttam and Gaurav.
Shri Dhirender Mathur, Ld. counsel for the accused Hitesh @
Handa.
An exemption application has been filed on behalf of accused
Gaurav @ Mini by Sh. Jai Singh Yadav Advocate.
Heard. For the reasons mentioned in the application, accused
Gaurav @ Mini is exempted from his personal appearance for today only
through his counsel.
Examination in chief of PW-5 Ranjit Kumar Mahto recorded.
His further examination in chief is deferred for want of accused Gaurav @
Mini.
PWs ASI Randhir, Ct. Yudhbir, Ct. Jagbir, HC Sunder, MHC
(M) are present. They are discharged unexamined for today.
PW Ct. Pradeep Hooda has sent request that he is on leave till
21.5.2015.
Put up on 4.6.2015 for remaining prosecution evidence.
At this stage, PW Ranjit Kumar Mahto submits that since he
would not be available after 29.5.2015 on account of marriage of his
nephew at Bihar, hence, case now to put up on 9.7.2015 and 10.7.2015
for prosecution evidence.
PWs Ranjit Kumar, ASI Randhir, Ct. Yudhveer, Ct. Jagbir, HC
Sunder be summoned for 9.7.2015.
Remaining
witnesses
be
Summons be also issued to
summoned
for
10.7.2015.
MHC(M) to produce the case
property on both the dates. IO be present on both the dates.

(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
Dwarka Courts/Delhi/15.05.2015(RA)
Suman Rawal Vs M/s Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd and Anr.

CR No. 32/14
15-05-2015
Present: None.
No time left for dictating the orders, as I was
busy in dictating orders in other case titled Sai Cargo
Movers and Anr. Vs Balaji Cargo, bearing CR No. 35/15.
Put up for orders on 23-05-15.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
Dwarka Courts/ New Delhi
15-05-2015

CR No. 33/14
15-05-2015
Present: None.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
15-05-2015

CR No. 34/14
15-05-2015
Present: None.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
15-05-2015

CR No. 35/14
15-05-2015
Present: None.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
15-05-2015

CR No. 36/14
15-05-2015
Present: None.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
15-05-2015

CR No. 37/14
15-05-2015
Present: None.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
15-05-2015

CR No. 38/14
15-05-2015
Present: None.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
15-05-2015

CR No. 39/14
15-05-2015
Present: None.
(Ravinder Kaur)
South West District
15-05-2015

List New2.asp

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

List New2.asp

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TA No.

applicant. As such, no order is required to be

present revision petition is dismissed in default.

has been convicted in case FIR No.

92/2013, U/S 454/380/411 IPC of PS Civil Line, Karnal

he is presently lodged at Karnal Jail,

PPA No. 2/2010

subject to cost of Rs. 2,000/-

each, to be deposited by both the parties with DLSA.

Rs. 80,000/- to the respondent.

has requested for some more

time for making payment of remaining amount.

be also directed to pay some interest

counsel of the appellant, on the next date of hearing.

25.5.2015. Appellant is directed to appear in person on the next

Contempt Appl. No. 1/2014

None for the petitioner.

petitioner despite repeated calls,

petition is dismissed in default.

ARBT No. 125/2014

Chauhan, Adv. proxy for Sh. Anurag

Jain, counsel for the respondent company.

adjournment. It is further submitted that they were under

made out for adjournment however, in the interest of justice,

ARBT No. 126/2014

Chauhan, Adv. proxy for Sh. Anurag

Jain, counsel for the respondent company.

adjournment. It is further submitted that they were under

made out for adjournment however, in the interest of justice,

ARBT No. 127/2014

Chauhan, Adv. proxy for Sh. Anurag

Jain, counsel for the respondent company.

adjournment. It is further submitted that they were under

made out for adjournment however, in the interest of justice,

ARBT No. 128/2014

Chauhan, Adv. proxy for Sh. Anurag

Jain, counsel for the respondent company.

adjournment. It is further submitted that they were under

made out for adjournment however, in the interest of justice,

ARBT No. 129/2014

Chauhan, Adv. proxy for Sh. Anurag

Jain, counsel for the respondent company.

adjournment. It is further submitted that they were under

made out for adjournment however, in the interest of justice,

ARBT No. 130/2014

Chauhan, Adv. proxy for Sh. Anurag

Jain, counsel for the respondent company.

adjournment. It is further submitted that they were under

made out for adjournment however, in the interest of justice,

ARBT No. 131/2014

Chauhan, Adv. proxy for Sh. Anurag

Jain, counsel for the respondent company.

adjournment. It is further submitted that they were under

made out for adjournment however, in the interest of justice,

ARBT No. 132/2014

Chauhan, Adv. proxy for Sh. Anurag

Jain, counsel for the respondent company.

adjournment. It is further submitted that they were under

made out for adjournment however, in the interest of justice,

ARBT No. 133/2014

Chauhan, Adv. proxy for Sh. Anurag

Jain, counsel for the respondent company.

adjournment. It is further submitted that they were under