CENTRAL UNIVERSITY

OF SOUTH BIHAR

…………………………………………………………………………
…

Draft on: - Drafting Pleading & Conveyancing

…………………………………………………………………………………
….

Submitted by: - Submitted to:-

Bablu kumar sharma Deep Naryan Sir Suchi Ma’am
B.sc.LLb (Hons.) Assistant professor
9th semester School of law and governance
CUB1413115008 CUSB

1|Page
 Acknowledgement
I hereby take the opportunity thank to Deep Narayan sir & Suchi Ma’am, for his consent and
the inspiration that he radiates. His jovial behaviour and ease making attitude eased my tension
and the initial doubts that I had about my potentialities. I also want to thank my friends who
helped me a lot in preparing this Draft. I have also taken help from several books and websites
for doing this. Ultimately, I once again thank Deep Narayan sir & Suchi Ma’am, who made
indelible impact on me which shall go beyond the pages of this project and reflect in all my
endeavours of life.

Hoping Acceptance and Appreciation from you, I hereby submit this project

- Bablu Kumar Sharma

2|Page
 Table of content
S No. Content Page No.
01 Complaint of Affray (S. 160, I.P.C.) 4-5
02 Application for seeking maintenance (S. 125, Cr.P.C 1973) 6
03 An application for Transfer of a case (S. 408. Cr.P.C 1973) 7
04 Criminal miscellaneous Application 8-9
05 Appeal against conviction in the court of session judge under section 10
324 Cr.P.C 1973
06 Appeal to the high court in case of acquittal under section 378, 11-12
Cr.P.C 1973
07 A petition of revision under high court under section 397, code of 13-14
Criminal Procedure, 1973
08 A petition of revision in the session court under section 397, code of 15-16
Criminal Procedure, 1973
09 Plaint (Suit for an account against an Agent) 17-18
10 Written Statement (Suit for an account against an Agent) 19-20
11 Plaint ( for an account by an Agent against principle) 21-22
12 Written statement (Suit for an account against principle)
13 Application for impleading legal representative order 1 Rule 10 of 23-24
C.P.C 1908
14 Application under Section 237 of Indian Succession Act for probate 25-26
of copy or draft of lost Will.
15 Affidavit on behalf of plaintiff 27-28
16 Form of execution of decree 29
17 Form of memorandum of Appeal 30-31
18 Form of Review (Under section 114, order XLVII, Rule 1, C.P.C 32-33
1908)
19 Form of writ petition in High Court 34-35
20 Form of writ petition in supreme court of India 36
21 Simple mortgage 37-39
22 Draft for sale deed 40-41
23 Mortgage by conditional sale 42-44
24 Usufructuary Mortgage 45-46
25 Lease Deed 47-48
26 Gift Deed (Settlement Deed) with Power of Revocation 49-51
27 Promissory note 52-53
28 Appointment of one Attorney in Place of Another 54-55
29 Simple Will giving All Property to One Person 56
30 Mortgage by deposit of Title Deed 57

3|Page
 Complaint of Affray (S. 160, I.P.C 1860)
IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE 1st CLASS AT
GAYA
Complaint no……….of 2018
Avinash Kumar Son of Kavindra sharma

R/o Moh- Nandan Bigha P.O+ P.S- Tekari

Dist- Gaya (Bihar), Pin code- 824236 ………………………….……………Complainant

Versus

1. Shriram kumar,Son of Ramdular sharma

R/o Moh- Deodeharpur, P.O+P.S- Tekari

Dist- Gaya (Bihar), Pin code- 824236

2. Vikash kumar, Son of Ramadhar singh

R/o Moh- Deodeharpur, P.O+P.S- Tekari

Dist- Gaya (Bihar), Pin code- 824236 …………………………………………… Accused

Police Station Tikari

Complaint under Section 160, I.P.C.
The complainant most respectfully submits to the court states
1. That the accused No. 1 and Accused No.2 are having their shops adjacent to each
other near the Bus stand locality, Gaya.
2. That on 10 August of 2018, a customer Amit Kumar, was going on the shop of Accused
No. 1. The accused No. 2 called customer Amit Kumar, to which the accused No. 1
resisted. There was exchange of hot words between Accused No. 1 and accused No 2,
virtually they came to blows on the road which lasted about 15 minutes. As a Result of
the fighting between Accused No. 1 and Accused No.2, all the traffic on the road came
to stop and, thereby, public peace was disturbed.
3. The accused persons Accused No.1 and Accused No.2 thus committed affray'
punishable under Section 160, Indian Penal Code

PRAYER

4|Page
 The complainant, therefore, prays that action be taken against the accused persons they
may be summoned and directed to face the trial according to law.

Place – Gaya Complainant’s Sd-

Date – 12/08/2018 [AVINASH KUMAR]

5|Page
 Application for seeking maintenance (S. 125, Cr.P.C 1973)
IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE 1st CLASS AT
GAYA
Application no......of 2018

Madhubala, wife of Vinod Kumar

D/o Shri Sunil sharma

R/o vill – Turi P.O- Turi P.S- Main

Dis- Gaya (Bihar) Pin code- 824236 …...……………………………….Applicant

Versus

Vinod Kumar son of Ramashish Singh

R/O Vill- Noni P.O- Tikari P.S- Tikari

Dis-Gaya (Bihar) Pin code- 824236 ……………….. ………………….Respondent

Application for maintenance under section 125, Cr.P.C. 1973

Sir,

The applicant most respectfully states as under:

1. That a lawful marriage took place between Applicant and Respondent on 19th May
of 2002 in Guwahati at Kamakhya temple.
2. That just after marriage the respondent along with his family started to demand
dowery. Initially the applicant's parents managed to meet the demands. But later on
the greed increased of the respondent's family. Ultimately the father of the applicant
refused to give any money furthermore which the respondent’s family took in
revengeful attitude.
3. That the applicant was ousted from the matrimonial home one month back on 28th
August of 2018 that is why she is living in parental house with her parents.
4. That the applicant is in severe need of economic help because she does not want to
increase financial burden on her already burdened parents.
5. It is, therefore, prayed to pass an order directing the respondent to pay to the applicant
Rs. 2000/- (Rupee two thousand only) per month as maintenance.
Place- Gaya Applicant Sd-
Date – 05/09/2018 [MADHUBALA]

6|Page
 An application for Transfer of a case (S. 408. Cr.P.C 1973)
THE COURT OF SESSIONS JUDGE AT GAYA
Application no……..of 2018
Ajmal khan, Son of Afjal khan
R/o viil- Thanapur P.O- Thanapur
P.S- Allipur Dis- Gaya (Bihar) ……………………………………………………Applicant
Versus
State of Bihar ……………………………………………………………………..Prosecution
F.I.R No -87 of 2018
Police station- Allipur
Under section 326 of I.P.C
Application for transfer under Section 408, Cr.P.C., 1973
Sir,
The applicant respectfully states as under:
1. That the above mentioned criminal case is pending before Miss Swati Singh Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class Gaya.
2. That on 1st July of 2018, the recording of prosecution witnesses was going on.
Defence Counsel demanded sufficient time to cross examine the prosecution
witnesses but the Miss Swati Singh said that "Do not waste the time of the court as I
know that the accused has committed the alleged crime."
3. That in these circumstances, the applicant not have hope of fair justice.

4. It is, therefore, prayed that a transfer order of the present case file may passed and the
case may be transferred to any other Judicial Magistrate so that justice should appear
to be done to the applicant.

Place – Gaya Advocate Sd- Applicant Sd-

Date – 02/07/2018 [BABLU SHARMA] [AJMAL KHAN]

7|Page
 IN THE HIGH COURT AT PATNA
Criminal miscellaneous Application No……2018
In the matter of an application for bail under
section 439 (l) (a), Criminal Procedure code.
And
In the matter of Criminal Case No 412of 09 of the
Court of Session at Gaya under section 122 I.P.C
titled as state of Bihar v. Ram Kumar
To,
The Hon’ble Chief Justice and his Companion Justices Of the said Hon'ble Court.
The humble Application of the Applicant abovenamed.
Most respectfully showeth:
1. That applicant along with 28 persons was committed to the Court of Session on 24th
November of 2016 on a charge under Section 122, I.P.C. on the allegation that
applicant conspired with certain persons to wage war against the Government of
India and has been collecting arms, ammunition, etc. for the purpose.
2. That the trial at the Sessions Court commenced on 5th January of 2017 and as many
as 55 witnesses have been examined by the prosecution at the trail
3. That although the prosecution evidence has been closed and the statements of the
accused persons are being recorded there is no likelihood of the trial being
terminated soon and that it will protract for a considerable length of time.
4. That the Applicant's application for bail at the trial Court was rejected on 10th March
of 2017 while some applications for bail of some of the accused were allowed.
5. That Applicant is a social worker having done many social works known to the
people of the locality where he is being held in great esteem.
6. That there was no impediment in granting bail to applicant as there is no danger of
the petitioner's fleeing from justice nor of his tampering with the prosecution
witnesses.
7. That applicant is in jail for the last one year and so if he be kept in jail he fears that
he will not be able to defend himself properly.

8|Page
 PRAYER

In the facts and circumstances set forth above the applicant most humbly prays that your
Lordships may be graciously pleased to release the applicant on bail.

And the applicant as if duty bound shall ever pray.

Place- Patna Applicant

Date – 05/06/2017 [RAM KUMAR]

9|Page
 APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION IN THE COURT OF
SESSION JUDGE UNDER SECTION 374 CR.P.C 1973

IN THE COURT OF SESSION JUDGE GAYA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO……..OF 2018

MR. Amrender kumar, aged about 25years

And Mrs Sunil sharma, aged about 29year …………………...……………………...Accused

Verses

State of Bihar ……………………………………………………………………….Appellant

Appeal against order dated 4th August of 2018 passed by Magistrate against conviction
and sentence passed by him under Section 378 of IPC

IPC in Criminal case no187of 2017 titled as State of Bihar v. Amrender kumar and
sunil sharma

Sir,

The appellant most respectfully submits the appeal on the following grounds:

1. Because the conviction and sentence are illegal and against facts on record.
2. Because the order of the learned Magistrate is against law and is not maintainable.
3. Because the appellant is innocent and has been illegally convicted and sentenced by
the learned Magistrate.

PRAYER

It is most respectfully prayed that the appeal may be allowed and the Conviction and sentence
passed may please be set aside.

Place – Gaya Applicant’s Sd-

Date – 04/09/2018 [AMRENDRA KUMAR]

[SUNIL SHARMA]

10 | P a g e
 APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT IN CASE OF ACQUITTAL
UNDER SECTION 378, Cr.P.C 1973

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.........2018

(UNDER SECTION 378, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973)

State of Bihar ………………………………………………………………. Appellant

Verses

Manish Singh and others ……………………………………………………..Accused

APPEAL AGAINST ORDER DATED 8th August of 2018

STATE OF BIHAR VERSUS MANISH SINGH AND OTHERS AGAINST

ACQUITI'AL OF THE ACCUSED PERSONS PASSED BY THE COURT OF GAYA

To,

The Hon'ble Chief Justice and his Companion Judges of High Court

The appellant above named most respectfully prefer the appeal on the following amongst other:

GROUNDS OF APPEAL

1. Because the accused persons have been erroneously acquitted by the learned Magistrate
against the evidence of record against them.
2. Because the offences have been proved to the hilt of the Case and there is no vacuum
or lacuna in the evidence against the accused persons
3. Because no question for giving any benefit of doubt to the accused persons arises in the
matter on the face of evidence on record against them and the case has been proved on
all fours.

4. Because the order passed in the matter is illegal and not maintainable in law.

11 | P a g e
 PRAYER

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow
the appeal and convict and sentence the respondents according to law as may be deemed fit
and expedient, or and remand the case for fresh disposal after taking further evidence if so
required.

Place – Patna Public Prosecutor’s Sd-

Date – 10/08/2018 [AMIT KUMAR SHARMA]

12 | P a g e
 Under section 397, code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION NO........OF 2018
Mahindera Singh …………………………………………………………….Petitioner
Versus
State of Bihar ……………………………………………………………..Respondent
IN THE MATI'ER OF CRIMINAL REVISION UNDER SECTION 397 Cr.P.C.
AGAINST ORDER DATED 12th SEPTEMBER of 2018 IN CRIMINAL CASE NO 525 OF
2017 STATE OF BIHAR VERSUS MAHINDERA SINGH CONVICTING AND
SENTENCING THE ACCUSED.

To,
The Chief Justice & His Companion Judges of High Court.
The petitioner above named most respectfully submits this revision petition against the
impugned order above mentioned, on the following amongst other:

GROUNDS OF REVISION

1. Because the impugned order aforesaid is illegal and unsustainable in law.

2. Because the proceedings taken are quite irregular due to the following reasons.
3. Because the finding regarding taking part of the accused petitioner in the alleged
unlawful assembly is incorrect and improper.
4. Because the conviction and sentence passed against the accused are illegal and in the
wrongful exercise of jurisdiction also.
5. Because the sentence imposed is too severe and high.

PRAYER

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow
the revision petition and set aside the conviction and sentence passed against the petitioner
aforesaid and in any case if the conviction is maintained, the sentence imposed may please be
commuted as may be deemed fit.

13 | P a g e
Place – Patna Advocate Sd- Petitioner Sd-

Dated – 15/09/2018 [BABLU SHARMA] [MAHINDERA SINGH]

14 | P a g e
 IN THE COURT OF SESSION JUDGE GAYA
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. ……..OF 2018

UNDER SECTION 397, code of criminal procedure, 1973

Mithlesh Kumar Son of Shivnath Kumar ………………………………… Petitioner

R/o Moh- vivekanand colony

P.O+P.S- Tekari Dis- Gaya (Bihar)

Pin code 824236

Versus
State of Bihar ……………………………………………………………..Respondent
The Revision petition against
the order dated 12.8.2018
passed by the Court in criminal
case 512 of 2018 titled as state
of Bihar versus Mithlesh kumar

Sir,
The petitioner above named most respectfully submits this revision petition against the
order aforementioned on the following amongst other:

GROUNDS OF REVISION

1. Because the Order passed by the learned Magistrate is incorrect, illegal/improper in the
matter of giving, defining/sentence/order, recorded and passed.
2. Because the order of the learned Magistrate aforesaid is illegal and against the facts on
record.
3. Because the proceedings before the Court Of the Magistrate are irregular due to the
following reasons
(i) the learned lower court did not record statements of all witnesses tendered by
petitioner accused;
(ii) Also did not appreciate the evidence of petitioner.

15 | P a g e
 PRAYER

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the record of the criminal case no 184 of 2017
State of Bihar versus Mithlesh Kumar be called for and examined and the revision petition may
be allowed and the sentence/order recorded therein be set aside. It is further prayed that the
sentence may be suspended pending the criminal revision in this court and the accused.

Place – Gaya Advocate Sd- Applicant Sd-

Dated – 13/08/2018 [BABLU SHARMA] [MITHLESH KUMAR]

16 | P a g e
 Plaint
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION AT GAYA
Suit No. ……of 2018
Mr. Vikash Kumar Son of Dharmandra Sharma

Aged about 51 year

R/o Moh- Nandan Bigha P.O+ P.S- Tekari

Dist- Gaya (Bihar), Pin code- 824236 …………………………………………………………Plaintiff

Versus
Mr Avinash sharma son of Kavindra sharma

Aged about 45 year, occupation business,

Residing at road No. 04 Deodharpur

Rikabang, Tikari ……………………………...…….………………………………Defendant

Suit for an account against an Agent

The plaintiff states as follows:
1. That he appointed the defendant as his agent on 1st May of 2015 to collect rents from his
tenants, to pay rates and taxes, due in respect of the buildings from him, to effect repairs
thereto, and to file suits and take other proceedings in Connection with realisation of rent
2. That to effectuate and facilitate, the aforesaid purpose, the plaintiff executed a general
power-of-attorney, dated 5th June of 2015 favour of the defendant. The defendant was to
be paid 7 (seven) per cent commission on such realisation after deducting the expenses
or outgoings.
3. That the plaintiff. terminated the agency of the defendant by notice sent to him by
registered post on 31st March of 2018
4. That the defendant has not rendered account of his realisations and disbursement as from
8th August of 2016 to 30th March of 2018
5. That it is not possible to ascertain the exact sum due from the defendant to the plaintiff
in respect of the business of agency conducted by the defendant. It is also not known to
the plaintiff as to what sums the defendant has allowed to become time-barred on account
of his negligence to take action for realisations thereof within time prescribed by law.

17 | P a g e
 The plaintiff is accordingly entitled to a rendition of accounts from the defendant and to
payment of the sum due to the plaintiff from defendant.
6. That the cause of action arose at Gaya where the defendant resides or works for gain
within local limits of jurisdiction of this Court on 31st March of 2018 when the agency of
the defendant was terminated. The agency was to be conducted at Gaya Hence the Court
has jurisdiction.
7. The value of the suit for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction is tentatively fixed at
Rs 2200 (Two thousand two hundred) if any larger sum is found due to the plaintiff,
deficiency in court-fee will be paid. The abovementioned sum is stated to be sum due
tentatively under Order Vll, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
8. It is prayed that a decree for rendition of accounts from 08th August of 2016 to 30th March
of 2018 in relation to the business of the agency be passed in favour of the plaintiff against
the defendants. The books of the agency and other papers and documents and registers
appurtaining thereto be ordered to be delivered to the plaintiff. A commissioner be
appointed to examine the accounts of the defendant. Sum found due to the plaintiff from
the defendant be directed to be paid to the plaintiff. Costs of the suit be also awarded to
the plaintiff.

Place- GAYA Plaintiff Sd- Advocate Sd-

Date – 03/04/2018 [VIKASH KUMAR] [BABLU KUMAR SHARMA]

Verification- I Vikash Kumar son of Dharmendra Sharma the above named plaintiff, do hereby
verify that the contents of para nos. 1-5 are true to my personal knowledge and the contents of
the remaining paras are based on legal advice from my Advocate which I believe to be true.

Place – Gaya Plaintiff Sd-

Date – 03/04/2018 [VIKASH KUMAR]

18 | P a g e
 Written statement
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION AT GAYA
Suit No. ……of 2018
Mr. Vikash Kumar Son of Dharmandra Sharma

Aged about 51 year

R/o Moh- Nandan Bigha P.O+ P.S- Tekari

Dist- Gaya (Bihar), Pin code- 824236 ……………….......................…………………Plaintiff

Versus
Mr Avinash sharma son of Kavindra sharma

Aged about 45 year, occupation business,

Residing at road No. 04 Deodharpur

Rikabang, Tikari ……………………………………....……………………………Defendant

Suit for an account against an Agent

Written Statement on behalf of Defendant
The defendant replies as under:
1. Para 1 is admitted
2. Para 2 is admitted
3. Para 3 is admitted

Or

The defendant did not receive the alleged notice.

4. Para 4 is not admitted. The accounts have been duly rendered periodically and the
vouchers and documents relating to the above accounts have been delivered from
time to time to the plaintiff. The last occasion on which the account made up to 30th
March of 2017 was delivered along with documents relating thereto was on 4th April
of 2017
5. Para 5 is not correct and is not admitted. The accounts made up to 30th March of 2017
have already been rendered. The plaintiff ceased to finance the steps to be taken for
recovery and realisation of the arrears of rent, hence no further recoveries could be

19 | P a g e
 made. The plaintiff has himself contributed to the several items of rent to become
time-barred.
As the plaintiff has himself in his possession, the accounts relating to
period 1st April of 2017 to 30th March of 2018 hence no account can be rendered by
the defendant for this period.
6. The defendant does not contest the jurisdiction of the court.
7. Para 7 is legal.
8. It is submitted that the suit of the plaintiff be dismissed with costs.

Additional pleas

9. The plaintiff is estopped from claiming rendition of accounts as he himself is in

possession of the accounts in question up to 30th March of 2018 which were delivered
to him along with the papers and documents relating thereto on 1st April of 2017
10. The plaintiff was negligent in omitting to furnish the defendant with sufficient funds
to file suits against recalcitrant tenants against whom suits had to be filed for
realisation of dues. The defendant is not liable for any arrears having become barred
by time.
11. The plaintiff has himself been dealing with the tenants personally and realizing sums
due as rent from time to time. The plaintiff has not apprised the defendant of such
realisations. In case accounts are directed to be taken in this matter, the plaintiff be
also directed to render account of such realisations and give credit to the defendant
for commission at the stipulated rate on such realisations.

Place – Gaya Defendant Sd- Advocate Sd-

Date – 07/04/2018 [AVINASH KUMAR] [SAURABH SINGH]

Verification- I Avinash Kumar son of Kavindra Sharma the above named defendant, do hereby
verify that the contents of para nos. 1-6, 8-11 are true to my knowledge and the contents of the
remaining paras are based on legal advice from my Advocate which I believe to be true.

Place – Gaya Defendant Sd-

Date – 07/04/2018 [AVINASH KUMAR]

20 | P a g e
 Plaint
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION AT GAYA
Suit No. ……of 2018
Mr Aditya Kumar son of Mithlesh Sharma
Aged about 51yr, occupation business,
P.O + P.S- Tikari Dis- Gaya, Pin- 824236
Residing at Jain colony Tikari …………………………………………………………Plaintiff
Versus
Mr Suresh Sharma son of Shrinivas Sharma
P.O + P.S- Tikari Dis- Gaya, Pin- 824236
Aged about 45yr, occupation business,
Residing at Panchdevdta, Tekari…………………………….………………………Defendant

Suit for an account by an Agent against principle

The plaintiff begs to submit as under:

1. That the defendant's firm is publisher of several books and carries on business as
booksellers as well in Gaya city
2. That the plaintiff was approached by the defendant's representative and partner, Shri
Suresh Sharma to act as the sole agent of the defendant's books in Gaya sub-division.
The plaintiff agreed to it and he was thereupon appointed as such agent in that sub-
division on 16th March 2016 as per letter, 21st November of 2018 which filed with the
plaint.
3. That under the agreement, dated on 16th March of 2016 between the parties the plaintiff
was to get commission from the defendant on all books and articles sold in the said
area through any agency and in whatsoever manner. The rates of the commission are
mentioned below.
4. That later on 21st April of 2016 it was agreed between the parties that the plaintiff
should get the cost of a signboard, the rent of the book depot at Gaya where the books
of the defendant were exhibited for sale and the price of wooden shelves to the extent
of Rs. 15, Rs. 8 and Rs. 40 per mensem respectively.
5. That the plaintiff worked for defendant from 16th March of 2016 to 28th September of
2018

21 | P a g e
 6. That the account of sales of the books and articles effected in Gaya sub-division is in
possession of the defendant. The plaintiff made a demand for the inspection of the said
accounts but the defendant has refused to this reasonable request of the plaintiff. The
plaintiff has no certain knowledge of the number of books and articles and the prices
thereof which were sold in the said area during the period 6th August of 2017 to 28th
December of 2017
7. That the plaintiff values the suit under Order VII, Rule 2, tentatively at Rs 125000
(one lakh twenty five thousand only)
8. The cause of action arose on 25th November of 2018 when the plaintiff ceased to work
for the defendant and made a demand for rendition of accounts as aforesaid and
payment to him of the sum due from the defendant at Gaya where the work, of the
agency was to be carried on under the agreement. Hence the Court has jurisdiction.
9. The value of the suit for purposes of court-fee and jurisdiction is tentatively fixed at
Rs 1575 (Rupee one thousand five hundred seventy five). The plaintiff will pay court-
fee for the excess amount found due and decree in plaintiffs favour.
10. It is prayed that the defendant be directed to render account to the plaintiff for the
period for which he is found to have worked for the defendant and a preliminary decree
be passed therefor and a commissioner be appointed to examine the books of account
and other books of the defendant and take such evidences in this behalf as may be
produced by the parties to ascertain the total amount due to the plaintiff and a final
decree for the payment of the sum so found due be passed in plaintiff's favour against
the defendant. The costs of the suit be also awarded to the plaintiff.

Place – Gaya Plaintiff Sd- Advocate Sd-

Date – 29/12/2018 [ADITYA KUMAR] [BABLU KUMAR SHARMA]

Verification- I Aditya Kumar son of Mithlesh Sharma the above named plaintiff, do hereby
verify that the contents of para nos. 1-6 are true to my personal knowledge and the contents of
the remaining paras are based on legal advice from my Advocate which I believe to be true.

Place - Gaya Plaintiff Sd-

Date – 29/12/2018 [ADITYA KUMAR]

22 | P a g e
 Written statement of the defendant
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION AT GAYA
Suit No. ……of 2018
Mr Aditya kumar son of Mithlesh sharma
Aged about 51yr, occupation business,
Residing at Jain colony Tikari …………………………………………………………Plaintiff
Versus
Mr Suresh Sharma son of Shrinivas sharma
Aged about 45yr, occupation business,
Residing at Panchdevdta Tekari ………………………….…………………………Defendant

Suit for an account against principle

Written statement on behalf of Defendant
The defendant replies as under:
1. Para 1 is admitted
2. Para 2 as stated is not correct. The plaintiff himself solicited some work from the
defendant to earn his livelihood and assured the latter that the plaintiff had good
connection with the staff of the several schools in Gaya Sub-division and that he would
monopolise all orders for the purchase of books for the students in that locality. At his
request the plaintiff was given the letter filed with the plaint, as the plaintiff represented
that with the aid of the said letter, he would easily be able to persuade the staff of the
various to recommend to the Students for the purchase of the defendant's books.
3. Para 3 is admitted. It was, however, a part of the condition of the operation of this
agreement that the plaintiff would not sell the books of any other bookseller or
publisher.
4. Para 4 is admitted. Plaintiff, however, contravened the understanding between the
parties that he would not stock or display the books of any other party. The defendant's
partner paid a surprise visit to the plaintiff's depot at Gaya on 25th April of 2016 at 10:30
AM o clock and found that he was keeping in stock the books and selling them in
preference to the defendant's books.
5. It is denied that the plaintiff worked exclusively for the defendant during the period
stated in the plaint.

23 | P a g e
 6. The plaintiff not having acted in the sole interests of the defendant, he is not entitled to
inspect any of the account books or vouchers of the defendant. He has forfeited his
rights, if any, as sole agent of the defendant. He is only entitled to charge commission
with respect to the sales effected by him, of which he is presumed and obliged to keep
an account himself.
7. Para 7 is legal and needs no reply
8. Para 8 is denied. The Court however has jurisdiction to try the suit.
9. Para 9 is legal.
10. The plaintiff is not entitled to any relief, except the commission on books sold by him,
with respect of which he is bound to render account to the defendant. He is bound to
return the unsold books of the defendant to the latter. Appropriate relief may be given
to the defendant as well in this behalf.

Place – Gaya Advocate Sd- Defendant Sd-

Date – 29/12/2018 [SAURABH SINGH] [SURESH SHARMA]

Verification- I Suresh Sharma son of Shrivinash Sharma the above named plaintiff, do hereby
verify that the contents of para nos. 1-3 are true to my personal knowledge and the contents of
the remaining paras are based on legal advice from my Advocate which I believe to be true.

Place – Gaya Defendant Sd-

Date – 29/12/2018 [SURESH SHARMA]

24 | P a g e
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION AT GAYA
Application No. ……of 2018
in
(Suit No. ……of 2018)
1. Navin Kumar son of Shri Ravi Kumar and
2. Anjali Sharma wife of Ravi Kumar
Residence of Gutam Buddha colony Road No.2
Delha, Gaya…………………...……………………….……………………..Applicant

Verses

1. Mithles Sharma Son of Shri Babulal Sharma

Residence of Jain colony Road No. 02 Tikari ………….…………………Defendant

Application for impleading legal representative of deceased Shri Ravi Kumar Plaintiff.

Sir,

The applicant most respectfully states as under:

1. That the plaintiff hag expired on 3rd December of 2017

2. That the Right to sue survives in the following legal representatives of the deceased
which may be impleaded as plaintiff in the suit.
(i) Navin Kumar son of Shri Ravi Kumar
(ii) Anjali Sharma wife of Ravi Kumar
3. It is therefore prayed that the above noted legal heirs of the deceased plaintiff may be
allowed to be impleaded as plaintiffs in the above suit.

Place – Gaya Applicant

Date – 08/12/2018 (1) [NAVIN KUMAR]

(2) [ANJALI SHARMA]

25 | P a g e
Verification.—l do hereby verify that the Contents of all paragraphs are true to the
knowledge and belief of me. Nothing has been concealed therein.

Place – Gaya Applicant

Date – 08/12/2018 (1) [NAVIN KUMAR]

(2) [ANJALI SHARMA]

26 | P a g e
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION AT GAYA
Suit No……. of 2018

In re, Estate of Mundrika Singh ……………………….......................................... Deceased

Probate Petition No .......... of 2017

Petition of Mr. Shiv Kumar Occupation business,

Residing at Gautam Budha road, Gaya. ………………………………………………Petitioner

Application under Section 237 of Indian Succession Act for probate of copy or draft of
lost Will.

The petitioner aforesaid states as under :

1. That Shri Mundrika singh of owner of estate died on 15th of December 2017 at his
residence.
2. That Shri Mundrika singh aforesaid duly executed his last Will and testament at Gaya
on 10th of April 2016 in the presence of witnesses after the same was drafted by Lal s/o
Vipul ji Mahto resident of Vishnupad, Gaya, the terms whereof were accepted by the
said Shri Mundrika singh testator.
3. That the said Shri Mundrika singh having died during disturbances at the time of
partition all his documents and movable property was lost or looted and the said original
last Will of the said testator is not forthcoming.
4. That the draft of the said will was prepared by Sundar Lal s/o Vipul ji Mahto resident
of Vishnupad,Gaya who kept a correct copy of the said Will and this copy was initialled
by the testator at the time the said will dated 10th of April 2016 executed.
5. That the said Will was duly executed.
6. That the petitioner was named as an executor in the said Will.
7. That the assets which are likely to come to the hands of the petitioner amount to about
Rs 1000000.

27 | P a g e
 8. That the following properties of the said testator are situate within the jurisdiction of
this court :
I) House, near ward no.13, kachahri road, Gaya.
II) Land of 1.2 Bigha near, Hanuman Nagar, Chaparda Road, Gaya.

9. That to the best of the belief of the petitioner no application has been made to any other
court for a probate of the said Will. It is, therefore, prayed that the copy of the Will of
Mundrika Singh dated 10th of April 2016 initialled by the testator as aforesaid, be
directed under Section 267 of Indian Succession Act to be produced by Shri Shri Sundar
Lal Son of Vipul ji Mahto who has the possession thereof, and probate of the copy of
the said Will (now lost) be granted to the petitioner.

Place – Gaya Advocate (Sd.) Petitioner (Sd.)

Date: 02/02/2018 [BABLU SHARMA] [SHIV KUMAR]

Verification
It is verified that the contents stated in paras’ no. 1 to 9 are correct to my knowledge and belief.
Nothing has been concealed therein.

Place – Gaya Petitioner (Sd.)

Date : 02/02/2018 [SHIV KUMAR]

28 | P a g e
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION AT GAYA
Suit No. ……of 2018
In the matter of Pankaj Kumar versus Aditya Kumar
AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF
I Pankaj Kumar son of Sri Raj Kumar Pd. Bahuar Chaura, Nawagarhi, P.S.- Civil Lines,
Dist.- Gaya do hereby solemnly declare and affirm on oath as under:

1. That I gave Rs. 90000 as to Mr. Aditya Kumar on 1st January of 2018 at the interest
rate of 12% per annum.
2. That now Mr. Aditya Kumar is to pay to me 1 lakh including interest.

Place- Gaya Deponent Sd-

Date – 05/01/2018 [ADITYA KUMAR]

Verification— I do hereby verify that the contents of paras 1-2 are correct to my knowledge
and belief. Nothing has been concealed therein.

Place – Gaya Deponent Sd-

Date – 05/01/2018 [ADITYA KUMAR]

29 | P a g e
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION AT GAYA

Sir,
I Bablu Kumar Sharma decree-holder do hereby apply for the execution of decree herein
below set forth:

1. No of suit Civil suit no. 102 of 2017

2. Name of Parties. Mr Bablu Kumar Sharma son of Mithlesh Sharma
Aged about 51yr, occupation business, residing
at Jain colony Tikari (Plaintiff)
Mr. Kamaljit Chandra son of Sri Atul Chandra Near
Anand Cinema S.P. Road, Gaya, Pin code-8230001,
(Defendant)
3. Date of decree 5th September of 2017
4. Whether any appeal No
5. Payment or Adjustment None
6. Previous application, if None
any with date and result
7. Amount with interest due As per decree
upon the decree or other
relief granted thereby
together with particulars
of any cross decree
8. Amount Of costs, if As per decree
any awarded
9. Against whom to be Mr. Kamaljit Chandra
executed
10. Mode in which the
assistance of the court
is required

30 | P a g e
I pray that the total amount of Rs 150000 (One lakh Fifty thousand only) together with interest
at 12% p.a. upto the date of payment and the costs of taking of this execution, be realised by
attachment and sale of immovable property of the defendant as per annexed list and paid to me.

Place – Gaya Through Counsel Decree-holder

Date – 07/09/2018 [SUNIL SHARMA] [BABLU KUMAR SHARMA]

Verification- I do herby verify that the contents of this execution application true and correct
to my knowledge and belief. Nothing has been concealed therein.

Place – Gaya Decree-holder

Date – 07/09/2018 [BABLU KUMAR SHARMA]

31 | P a g e
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PATNA
(Under section -96 of CPC 1908)
Civil Appellate jurisdiction
First Appel No……….of 2018
Mr Vikash Kumar son of Dharmendra Sharma
Aged about 51yr, occupation business,
Residing at 08 vivevekanand colony Tikari …………...............………………………Plaintiff
Versus
Mr Avinash sharma son of Kavindra Sharma
Aged about 45yr, occupation business,
Residing at road No. 04 Deodharpur
Rikabang, Tikari ……………………………...………..……………………………Defendant
Appeal against judgment and decree
passed by Civil Judge, Senior Division,
Gaya on 1-2-2017 in Suit no. 45 of 2006
Valuation of the Appeal is Rs 20000 (twenty thousand)
The court Fee paid is Rs……………….
To,
THE HON"BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND
OTHER PUISNE JUSTICES OF THE
HIGH COURT
The appellant most respectfully showeth that:
1. The respondent has filed the suit No. 37 of 1985 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior
division, Gaya, against the appellant for the recovery of Rs. 15,000 which sum the
allegedly owed to the respondent against a promissory note executed by the appellant
in favour of the respondent.
2. The learned Judge heard the said suit and passed a decree of Rs. 20.000 against the
appellant on the 1st of February, 2018.
3. The appellant being aggrieved by the said decree and judgment prefers this appeal on
the following amongst other.

32 | P a g e
 GROUNDS:

(i) That the learned Judge erred in holding that the promissory note was legally valid.
(ii) That the promissory note was invalid and hence not enforceable against the
appellant.
(iii) That no consideration has passed from the respondent to the appellant under the
promissory note.
(iv) That the learned judge erred in holding that the promissory note was executed by
the appellant.
(v) That the hand-writing expert was not called for inspite of the repeated requests from
the appellant.
(vi) That the learned Judge erred in not appreciating the evidence of the appellant
(defendant) and his witnesses.
(vii) The decision of the learned Judge is against the weight of evidence in the case, and
the learned Judge ought to have dismissed the plaintiff’s suit.
(viii) That the decision of the trial Court is against justice, equity and good conscience
and hence not sustainable.
4. The appellant has not filed any other prior to this in the Hon’ble Court.

PRAYER

(i) The appellant, therefore, submits that the Honourable Court be pleased to send for the
records of the suit from the trial Court and set aside the decree and the judgment of
the trial Court.
(ii) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this appeal, the respondent be restrained by
an order of the Hon'ble Court from executing the aforesaid decree against both person
and property of the appellant.

(iii) The relief sought by way of this appeal is that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to
allow the appeal. judgment and decree of the Trial Court aforesaid be set aside, or be
pleased to pass such order and further order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper
in the circumstances of the case in order to do justice in the matter.

Place – Patna Advocate Sd- Appellant Sd-

Date – 05/02/2018 [BABLU SHARMA] [VIKASH KUMAR]

33 | P a g e
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AT GAYA
Review application No…….of 2018
(Under section 114, order XLVII, Rule 1, C.P.C 1908)
O.S No……..of 2018
Avinash Kumar Son of Kavindra Sharma

R/o Moh- Nandan Bigha P.O+ P.S- Tekari

Dist- Gaya (Bihar) Pin code- 824236 …………………………………………………Plaintiff

Versus

1. Shriram Kumar Son of Ramdular Sharma

R/o Moh- Deodeharpur P.O+P.S- Tekari

Dist- Gaya (Bihar) Pin code 824236

2. Vikash Kumar Son of Ramadhar Singh

R/o Moh- Deodeharpur P.O+P.S- Tekari

Dist- Gaya (Bihar) Pin code 824236………….......…………………………………Defendant

IN THE MATTER OF REVIEW OF JUDGMENT AND ORDER

10th FEBRUARY OF 2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
JUDGE
Sir,
The plaintiffs most respectfully submit as under:
1. That this respectable court has passed the decree of the suit of the plaintiff/landlord
against the defendant/tenants on 10th February of 2017 on the ground that the house was
a new construction and the defendants were let out the house under an agreement duly
executed; that the tenancy was from month to month and that the State Rent Act was
not applicable to the construction being a new one, and that the plaintiff's son having
returned from England after completing his studies, hence he required the
accommodation, and one month’s notice to eject was given and thereafter the suit was
filed which was decree as aforesaid.

34 | P a g e
 2. That the defendant diligently contested the suit, but they could not find out the origin
of the constructions from Municipal records. But suddenly when the defendants traced
and searched the documents register of the sub-Registrar for the last 30 years, he found
that the plaintiffs had purchased the land under the said house from Gaya in twenty-
five years back, he got certified copy of that document and thereafter he traced the
Municipal Records of the city of Gaya and found that he passed a site map of the house
in Gaya 19 to 22 years back and got constructed the house and the plaintiff had also
filed a completion certificate of the house. The defendants have got certified copies of
these documents also.
3. That the aforesaid documents conclusively prove that the house was old one on which
the State Rent Act applied and the plaintiffs could not evict the defendants by filing a
suit in this court, and the order passed by this Court is without jurisdiction and is liable
to set aside.
4. That the defendant have filed no appeal against the said order.

PRAYER

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this court may be please to allow the review
application, set aside the judgment and decree.

Place – Gaya Advocate Sd- Defendant Sd-

Date – 15/02/2018 [BABLU SHARMA] [SHRIRAM KUMAR]

[VIKASH KUMAR]

35 | P a g e
 MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION WRIT OF HEBEAS
CORPUS
UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE OF PATNA
W.P. No……..2018
Between:
Mr. Y. Koteswar Rai,
S/o. Sri M.N. Rai,
Aged 40 years,
R/o. Patna……………………………………………………………………………..Petitioner
AND
1) Govt. of Bihar Rep. by its Secretary for Home, Patna.
2) The Director General of Police, State of Bihar, Patna.
3) The Superintendent of Police, Arwal District, Bihar…………………………………….
Respondents
Address for service on the above named petitioners is that of their Counsel M/s. Ram
& Co., Advocates, High Court of Bihar, Vengal Rai Nagar, Patna-04.

For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon’ble
Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus or any other appropriate writ or order
or direction to the respondents directing them to forthwith set the petitioner at liberty who has
been illegally detained by the Arwal Police respondents No. 3 and pass such other order or
orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

Place – Patna Counsel for Petitioner.

Date – 02/04/2018 [BABLU SHARMA]

36 | P a g e
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AT NEW-DELHI

(WRIT JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO………..OF 2018

IN THE MATTER OF:

Sri Pradeep Kumar Agarwal

S/o Sri Brij Mohan Pd. Agarwal

Khuti Kewal Khurd, P.O.+P.S.- Hunterganj, Dist.- Chatra (Jharkhand)…………PETITIONER

Vs.

Muncipal Corporation of Delhi, Through Its Commissioner …………………..RESPONDENT

Respectfully showeth :

1. That the petitioner is a citizen of India residing at_______. The respondent is Muncipal
Corporation of Delhi having their office at Town Hall, Chandni Chowk, Delhi.

BRIEF FACTS:-

2. That the petitioner is aggrieved by the illegal appointments of daily wage workers by the
M.C.D. office in defiance of Notification No. MCD/LF/01-103 dated 1st February of 2017
which requires the M.C.D. to appoint only those person as Daily wage worker who are below
the age of 30 years as an 01st October of 2017. The said Notification was issued after it was
duly approved.

3. That the petitioner is of 27 Year of age and was working as a daily wage worker, when on
1st December of 2014 his services were terminated without notice/prior intimation. The
Petitioner during his service worked to the satisfaction of his superiors. The respondent has
appointed Sh. Ompal, Sh. Ram and Smt Maya in defiance of the said notification
M.C.D./LF/01-/03 at 01st February of 2017 as all the three person namely Om Pal, Sh. Ram
and Smt. Maya are more than 30 years of age as on 1st October 2017. The about named persons
were appointed in utter disregard of Notification. The respondent, however, removed the
petitioner from service although petitioner met the requirements. That the Petitioner made
representation to the respondent vide letter dated 1st October2017, 2nd January of 2017 and also

37 | P a g e
met the commissioner personally and apprised them of his grievance, however nothing
materialized.

4. That in spite of oral and written representations the respondent have not cared to act and are
maintaining stoic silence on the whole issue.

5. That the petitioners have thus approached the Hon’ble court on amongst others the following
grounds

GROUNDS:

(a) Because the action of the respondent is contrary to law and good conscience.

(b) Because the action of the respondent is arbitrary, unreasonable, irrational and
unconstitutional.

(c) Because respondent have no right to play with the career of the petitioner.

(d) Because the petitioner was removed from job inspite of the fact that he was below age and
fulfilled all requirements.

(e) Because respondent appointed. Sh. Ompal, Sh. Ram and Smt. Maya despite their being
overage and not meeting requirements of Notification No. MCD/LF/01-103 dated 1st February
of 2017.

(f) Because the action of the respondent is bad in law

(g) That the Petitioner craves, leave of this Honorable Court to add, amend, and alter the
grounds raised in this petition.

6. That the cause of action in present case arose on 1st February of 2017 when the respondent
brought out the Notification No. MCD/LF/01-103 dated 1st February of 2017., it further arise
when on 1st December of 2014 the petitioner was removed from job inspite of the fact that he
was below age and fulfilled all requirements, it further arose when respondent appointed. Sh.
Ompal, Sh. Ram and Smt Maya despite their being overage and not meeting requirements of
Notification No. MCD/LF/01-103 dated 1st February of 2017, it further arose when
representations were made to respondent orally and in writing on 1st December of 2017, and
2nd January of 2017. The cause of action further arose when respondent did not act inspite of
the fact having brought to their notice. The cause of action is continuing one.

38 | P a g e
7. That the Petitioner has no other alternative efficacious remedy except to approach this
Hon’ble Court by way of this writ petition

8. That the petitioner has not filed any other similar writ petition either before this Hon’ble
Court or before the Supreme Court of India.

9. That there has been no undue delay in filing of this petition.

10. That the honorable court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition.

11. That the requisite court fee of Rs. 50/- has been affixed on this petition.

PRAYER :

The petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to :-

(a) Issue appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the
Respondents to cancel the illegal appointment made in disregard of Notification No.
MCD/LF/01-103 dated 1st February of 2017:and

(b) Issue necessary directions to appointment of petitioner and

(c) Issue any other further order/orders or direction/directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem
fit and appropriate on the facts and the circumstances of this case.

FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER ABOVENAMED SHALL EVER

PRAY.

Place – Delhi Advocate Sd- Petitioner Sd-

Date – 05/02/2018 [BABLU SHARMA] [PRADEEP KUMAR AGARWAL]

39 | P a g e
 Simple mortgage
1. This Deed of Simple Mortgage executed at 7th December of 2017 by Sri Amit Kumar
Agmera son of Sri Manoj Agmera Chowk Road, P.S.- Kotwali, Gaya hereinafter called
the mortgagor in favour of Sri Pradeep Kumar Agarwal son of Sri Brij Mohan Pd.
Agarwal Khuti Kewal Khurd, P.O.+P.S.- Hunterganj, Dist.- Chatra (Jharkhand)
hereinafter called the Mortgagee the, terms mortgagor and Mortgagee meaning and
including his respective heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives and
assigns witnesseth as follows :
2. Whereas the mortgagor is the absolute owner of the property fully described in the
schedule hereto, whereas the mortgagor is in urgent need of funds (for celebrating his
daughter's marriage/for discharging prior mortgage dated 31st March of 2022 in favour
of Sri Amit Kumar Agmera), whereas the mortgagor approached the mortgagee for a
loan of Rs 5 lakh (Rupees five lakh only) whereas the mortgagee has consented to the
same.
3. Now this Date of First Simple Mortgage witnesseth that in consideration of the premises
and in further consideration of the sum of Rs 5 lakh (Rupee five lakh only) paid by the
mortgagee to the mortgagor the receipt of which sum in manner aforesaid the mortgagor
doth hereby acknowledge, he the mortgagor doth hereby transfer, convey and assign
unto the mortgagee as and by way of first simple mortgage all the property more fully
described in the schedule hereto subject to the following terms and conditions viz :
(i) To repay the principal sum on demand (on any period agreed to between
the parties).
(ii) In the meanwhile to pay interest @ 18% p.a.
(iii) In the event of the mortgagor failing to pay the amount due under the
mortgage on demand, the mortgagee shall have a right to sue for recovery
of the said amount and if need be to have the property sold in the said
proceeding for due realisation of the mortgage-dues.
(iv) During the subsistence of the mortgage the mortgagor shall pay all public
dues and taxes accruing due in respect of the schedule mentioned property
and shall not allow the same to be proceeded against for recovery of such
dues and taxes. If the mortgagee were to spend money to save the
mortgage-property from being sold for recovery of said dues. Such monies
shall be, deemed and treated as principal amount, and recovered as such.

40 | P a g e
 (v) During the subsistence of the mortgage the mortgagor shall keep the
property mortgaged in good condition and shall not commit any act which
is destructive or permanently injurious thereto as to cause the security to
become insufficient.

The mortgagor doth assure the mortgagee that save the mortgage in favour of Soni sharma
to secure a sum of Rs 2 Lakh ( Rupee Two lakh only)under deed of First Simple Mortgage,
dated 31st March of 2022 there are now no other encumbrances subsisting on the mortgaged
property.

The mortgagor doth also assure the mortgagee that he shall continue to pay the interest due
on the first mortgage without any default and shall not render any act, deed or thing whereby
the mortgaged property will become insufficient security.

Witness:-

1. Amar kumar Son of Dharmendra sharma

Aged about 37yr resident at road No. 11
Nandan bigha Tikari
2. Rohit sharma Son of Mahindra sharma
Aged about 45yr resident at Road No. 05
Jain colony Tikari

Seller Sd- Purchaser Sd-

[AMIT KUMAR AGMERA] [PRADEEP KUMAR AGARWAL]

41 | P a g e
 Draft for sale deed
This deed of sale executed at Gaya on 15th August of 2018 by Shri Avinash Kumar, son of
Shri Kavindra Sharma, residing at Gautam Buddha colony Road No. 02 P.0+P.S- Delaha Gaya
(Bihar), Pin code- 8230001, a Hindu, hereinafter called the vendor to and in favour of
Mr.Ashish Kumar, Son of Satyendra Sharma at Gautam Buddha colony Road No. 02 P.0+P.S
– Delha, Gaya (Bihar), Pin code- 8230001, a Hindu, hereinafter called the purchaser, the terms
vendor and purchaser, wherever the context so admits, meaning and including their respective
heirs, executors, legal representatives and assigns, witnesses as follows.

Whereas the vendor is the absolute owner of the Schedule-mentioned property, he

having purchased the same under deed of sale, dated 12th February of 2018 registered as
document No. 472/2017 in the office of the Registrar of Assurances at A.P Colony Gaya belong
to Avinash Kumar under deed of sale dated Registered as document No 472/2017 in the office
of the Registrar of Assurances, the vendor being the sole heir to the said Satyendra Sharma
whereas the vendor has been in exclusive possession and enjoyment ever since then, whereas
the purchaser has agreed to purchase the same.

Now this deed of absolute sale witnesses that in consideration of the premises and in further
consideration of the sum of Rs 10 lakhs only, paid by the purchaser to the vendor, in under pay
cheque No 950020 6950020324 002860 Dated 12th February of 2018 drawn by State bank of
India in favour of the vendor, The receipt of which Sum in manner aforesaid the vendor doth
hereby acknowledge, he the vendor doth hereby grant transfer, convey an assign as and by way
of absolute sale unto the purchaser all that premises of being 1.5 acres Agricultural land-
building site in 0.5 acres house, ground and premises bearing door No 235/2017 more
particularly described in the schedule hereto together With all right, title, estate, interest,
property, claim and demand into and upon the schedule mentioned property with all rights,
waters, water courses, ways, easements, advantages, privileges, opportunities belonging to or
reputed to belong now or heretofore therewith or any part thereof, to have and to hold the same
unto and to the use of the purchaser absolutely and forever, free from all encumbrances,
charges, lien, trust, will, litigation lis pendens, attachment, right or demand of any kind
whatsoever.

The vendor has this day delivered vacant possession of the property more fully described
in the schedule hereto to the purchaser.

The vendor doth covenant with the purchaser as follows:

42 | P a g e
 1. The vendor is the sole person absolutely entitled to the property hereby conveyed and
has been in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the same and that he has full
power and authority to convey the same to the purchaser.
2. That property hereby conveyed shall be entered upon peaceably and quietly enjoyed
by the purchaser without any let or hindrance by the vendor or anyone claiming under
or through the vendor.
3. The purchaser shall henceforth collect the profits/income/rent from the schedule-
mentioned property.
4. The vendor has paid all the public charges, rates and outgoings in respect of the said
property till date
5. The vendor had not done or knowingly suffered or been a party or privy to any act,
deed or thing by reason whereof the said property is charged or encumbered or
affected in estate, title or otherwise.
6. The vendor shall keep the purchaser indemnified against all claims, actions,
proceedings, demands, damages and expenses whatsoever which the purchaser may
be put to by reason of any defect in title or breach by the vendor of any of the
covenants, assurances and representations contained herein.
7. The vendor shall at all times at the request of, and at the cost of, the purchaser execute
and cause to be executed and registered and do all such acts, deeds and things as may
reasonably be required of him for further and better assuring the schedule mentioned
property or any part unto and to the use of the purchaser.
8. The vendor has this day handed over the documents of title listed in Appendix I to
the purchaser.
9. The vendor has no objection to the rights and liberties he had with Electricity Board
including Security deposits and interest accrued thereon being transferred and
credited in favour of the purchaser; so too he has no objection to mutation in the field
records maintained by Revenue Department and in the assessment register
maintained by municipality and other public departments recognising the purchaser
as owner of the property hereby conveyed.

43 | P a g e
In witness whereof the vendor has set his hand and seal on the day and year first above

Written and in the presence of witnesses.

3. Vivek kumar Son of Dharmendra sharma

Aged about 37yr resident at road No. 11
Nandan bigha Tikari
4. Surendra sharma Son of Mahindra sharma
Aged about 45yr resident at Road No. 05
Jain colony Tikari

Seller Sd- Purchaser Sd-

[AVINASH KUMAR] [ASHISH KUMAR]

44 | P a g e
 Mortgage by conditional sale
1. This deed of mortgage by conditional sale executed at Gaya this day of January 2018
by Sri Ranjeet Kumar Gupta S/o Sri Mahavir Pd. Gupta H.No. 74, Nawagarhi, Gaya,
hereinafter called mortgagor to and in favour of Sri Rajesh Kumar S/o Sri Hare
Krishan Singh Pakdi P.O.+P.S.- Fatehpur, Dist.- Gaya hereinafter called the
Mortgagee, by conditional sale the terms Mortgagor and Mortgagee meaning and
including their respective heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives and
assignees witnesseth.
2. Whereas the vendor is the absolute owner of the Schedule-mentioned property, he
having purchased the same under deed of sale, dated 4th January of 2002 registered as
document No. 14/2002 in the office of the Registrar of Assurances belonged, Gaya,
under deed of sale date 7th December of 2018 Registered as document No 42/2018 in
the office of the Registrar of Assurances, the vendor being the sole heir to the said. Flat
142 Mahinder Appartment G.B Rode Gaya whereas the vendor has been in exclusive
possession and enjoyment ever since then, whereas the purchaser has agreed to
purchase the same.
3. Now this Deed of Mortgage by Conditional Sale witnesseth that in consideration of and
in further consideration of the sum of Rs 25 Lakh (Rupees Twenty five lakh only) paid
by the mortgagee to the mortgagor the receipt of which sum in manner aforesaid the
mortgagor doth hereby acknowledge, he the mortgagor doth hereby transfer, convey
and assign unto the mortgagee as and by way of mortgage by conditional sale pie
property more fully described in the schedule hereto subject to the following terms and
conditions namely:
(i) The mortgagor has conveyed by way of conditional sale the property to
the mortgagee herein the schedule-mentioned property as security for
repayment of the money borrowed under this deed on condition that on the
mortgagor paying the sum secured herein to the mortgagee within a period
of three years from this date the mortgagee shall reconvey the said
property to the mortgagor at the cost of the mortgagor and that in the
meantime the mortgagor shall pay interest at 18% p.a. every month on or
before the 10th of every succeeding month and on further condition that
in default of such payment within the period stipulated herein, the
conditional sale shall ripen into an absolute one and the mortgagee shall

45 | P a g e
 enjoy thereafter the said property absolutely and forever with all powers
Of alienation free from any let or hindrance from the mortgagor or any
One claiming under or through him and simultaneously the right of the
mortgagor to redeem Shall stand extinguished.
The mortgagor doth assure the mortgagee that the property hereby secured
under this mortgage by conditional sale is not subject to any encumbrance,
lien, charge, attachment or any proceedings.

In witness whereof the mortgagor herein has set his hand and seal on the day and year
first above-written and in the presence of witnesses:

5. Vinod kumar Son of Ramlakhan sharma

Aged about 37yr resident at road No. 1
Deodharpur, Rikabgabj, Tikari
6. Pritam sharma Son of Shankar sharma
Aged about 45yr resident at Road No. 08
Gautam Buddha colony, Tikari

Mortgagor Sd- Mortgagee Sd-

[RANJEET KUMAR GUPTA] [RAJESH KUMAR]

46 | P a g e
 Usufructuary Mortgage
This deed of Usufructuary Mortgage executed on 8th March 2018 by Sri Amit Baranwal S/o
Late Mohan Pd. Gupta Murarpur, Gaya hereinafter called the mortgagor to and in favour
of Sri Anil Kumar S/o Sri Surendra Pd. Jain Mandir Mahadev Ghat Ramana, P.S.- Civil Line,
Gaya hereinafter called the usufructuary mortgagee, the terms mortgagor and the usufructuary
mortgagee meaning and including their respective heirs. Executors, administrators, legal
representatives and assignees witnesseth.

Whereas the mortgagor is the absolute owner of the property and the mortgagor is in severe
need of money due to marriage of his daughter. Therefore, the Mortgagee has consented to give
Rs. 2 lac to the Mortgagor as a loan @ rate of 18% per annum.

Now this deed of usufructuary mortgage witnesseth that in consideration of the premises
and in further consideration of the sum of Rs. 2 Lakh(Rupees Two lakh only) paid by the
mortgagee to the mortgagor the receipt of which sum in manner aforesaid the mortgagor doth
hereby acknowledge, he, the mortgagor doth hereby transfer, convey and assign as and any of
Usufructuary Mortgage unto the mortgagee all that the property more fully described in the
schedule hereto subject to the following terms and conditions.

The mortgagee is hereby authorised to receive the rents and profits accruing from the
mortgaged property and appropriate net income that is gross income less payment of taxes and
public dues charged on the property, towards payment of interest in the first instance and the
balance if any towards the principal, and to remain in such possession and enjoyment until
payment of the mortgage-money and on such discharge of the mortgage the mortgagee shall
deliver back possession of the mortgaged property to the mortgagor in the same manner as the
former was put in possession.

The mortgagor has this day delivered vacant possession of the mortgaged
property/constructive possession of the same by directing the tenants to pay the rent henceforth
to the mortgagee.

The mortgagor assures the mortgagee that the mortgaged property is not subject to any
encumbrance, attachment of any kind, charge, or lien subsisting on the same.

In witness whereof the mortgagor has set his hand and seal on the day and year first above
written and in the presence of witnesses:

47 | P a g e
 1. Akashya kumar Son of Omprakash sharma
Aged about 37yr resident at road No. 11
Karkhura , Delha
2. Manoj kumar Son of Viashvanath sharma
Aged about 45yr resident at Road No. 03
Andar kila, Tikari

Mortgagor Sd- Mortgagee Sd-

[AMIT BARANWAL] [ANIL KUMAR]

48 | P a g e
 Lease Deed
This deed of lease made at 5th March of 2018 by and between Sri Shailendra Kumar S/o Late
Pratap Narayan Singh 88/2 Gewal Bigha Nutan Nagar, Sherghati, Road, Gaya and Dr.
Kamlesh Kr. Singh S/o Late Hit Narayan Pd. H.No. 44/51 Ramdhanpur, P.S.- Kotwali, Dist.-
Gaya as under:

Whereas the lessor is the absolute owner of the property more fully described in the
schedule, whereas the lessee approached the lessor for lease of the said property to the former,
whereas the lessor has consented to the same.

It is, hereby, mutually agreed to between the parties hereto as follows:

1. The property demised by the lessor to the lessee is the one that is more fully described
in the Schedule hereto.
2. The tenancy is for a period of three years from this date (i.e.) from 1st April 2015 to 31st
March 2018 The lessee is given the option to renew the lease for a further period of
three years provided he exercises his right to renew the lease three months prior to
expiry of the lease period herein and provided further that on such renewal the lessee
shall pay as monthly rent the present monthly rent plus 20% increase thereon.
3. The monthly rent is Rs 25000 (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) it does not include
charges or fees for amenities Such as water, electricity, etc. The lessee shall, himself,
bear the charges or fees for such amenities.

4. The demised premises shall be used for residential/ non-residential/manufacturing

purposes only.

5. The lessee has paid this day to the lessor a sum of Rs 5000 (Rupees Five thousand only)
as security deposit. The same is refundable to the lessee on the lessee's vacating and
surrendering vacant possession of the demised premises subject to adjustment by the
lessor as hereinafter stipulated. In the meantime, it shall not carry any interest.
6. The monthly rent shall be paid on or before 5th of the month succeeding that for which
the same shall fall due on 5th of every succeeding month.
7. The lessee shall not sublet the demised premises or any part thereof without, the written
consent of the lessor.
8. The lessee shall not erect any permanent structure in the demised premises or any part
thereof without the written consent of the lessor.

49 | P a g e
 9. The lessee is entitled to make his own arrangements for the additional electrical fittings
at his cost and responsibility and shall remove all such fittings at the time of vacating
the demised premises without causing any damage to the premises. Include charges or
fees for amenities Such as water, electricity, etc. The lessee shall, himself, bear the
charges or fees for such amenities
10. The lessee shall, at his cost carry out, minor repairs to, and colour/white wash, the
premises. The lessee should maintain the property in good condition and shall, at the
time of vacating the premises, hand over the same in the same condition as it was at the
time of letting subject to reasonable Wear and tear.
11. The lessee should allow the lessor and or his agents, at all reasonable times during the
subsistence of the lease to enter upon the property and inspect the condition thereof and
give or leave notice of any defect in such condition and if such defect is caused by any
act or default on the part of the lessee, his servants or agents, he is bound to make good
the same within three months from date of receipt of such notice by the lessor.
12. If the lessee becomes aware of any proceeding touching the demised property or any
encroachment he shall give with reasonable diligence notice thereof to the lessor.
13. The lessee shall not put the demised property for any purpose other than that for which
it is leased.
14. In case the lessee were to commit breach of any of the covenants contained herein, the
lease shall stand determined irrespective of the period stipulated herein, and the lessor
will be entitled to re-enter the same.
15. The lessee shall vacate and surrender vacant possession of the demised premises on the
expiry of the period of lease.
16. If at the time of vacating the premises any damage is found to have been caused to the
premises the lessee shall bear such cost as to repair the damages and if the lessee shall
fail to do so, the lessor is entitled to have the repair carried out and shall adjust such
cost against the security deposit in his hands and refund the balance subject to further
adjustments against arrears of electricity charges, water charges and Other public dues
payable by the lessee touching the demised premises.
17. The lessor shall pay the property tax and other taxes by virtue of possessing and
enjoying the property. In case the lessee were constrained to pay, he is entitled to adjust
such payments against the rents.

50 | P a g e
 18. The lessor assures the lessee that the lessee shall enjoy the demised premises without
any interruption or interference by him or at his instance as long as the lessee observes
his obligations under this deed of lease.
19. The term lessor shall mean and include his heirs, executors, administrators, legal
representatives and assignees while the term lessee will include only his wife and son
living as part of his family until his demise.
20. In other respects the Transfer of Property Act shall apply.

In witness whereof the lessor and the lessee set their respective hands and seals on the day and
year first above written and in the presence of witnesses

1. Vivek kumar Son of Dharmendra sharma

Aged about 37yr resident at road No. 11
Nandan bigha Tikari
2. Surendra sharma Son of Mahindra sharma
Aged about 45yr resident at Road No. 05
Jain colony Tikari

Lessor Sd- Lessee Sd-

[SHAILENDRA KUMAR] [KAMLESH KR. SINGH]

51 | P a g e
 Gift Deed (Settlement Deed) with Power of Revocation

1. This Deed of Settlement executed at 8th August 2018 by Mithlesh Kumar, Son of shri
Vishvnath Sharma, Resident at Jain colony Tikari, Gaya hereinafter called the settlor,
to and in favour of Soni sharma, Son of Mithlesh Shrma, Resident at Gautam Budhha
Colony, Delha, Gaya hereinafter called the settlee, the terms 'settlor' and 'settlee'
meaning and including their respective heirs, executors, administrators, legal
representatives and assignees witnesseth.
2. Whereas the settlor herein is the sole and absolute owner of the property more fully
described in the schedule, whereas the Settlee is his daughter since married but needs
permanent resource for her welfare, whereas the settlor is thus desirous of making
suitable provision for her and has decided to gift his property more fully described in
the schedule hereto to her.
3. Now, this Deed of Settlement witnesseth that in consideration of the premises and in
further consideration of the natural love and affection he has towards his daughter, he
the settlor doth hereby transfer, convey and assign as and by way of absolute gift unto
the settlee the property more fully described in the schedule hereto subject to the
condition that the settlee shall maintain and protect the settlor during his life time.
4. The Settlor has this day put the settlee, in vacant possession of the said property/in
constructive possession the said property by directing the tenants to attorn to the settlee.
The settlor has handed over this day the deed of settlement by authorising her to collect
the same from the registering officer and also the documents of title relating to the
schedule mentioned property.
5. The settlor doth covenant with the settlee that in case the settlee fails to maintain and
protect the settlor as stated supra, the settlor reserves his right to revoke this deed of
gift

In witness whereof the Donner and the Donee set their hand and seal on the day and year
first above written and in the presence of witness.

1. Vivek kumar Son of Dharmendra sharma

Aged about 37yr resident at road No. 11
Nandan bigha Tikari

52 | P a g e
 2. Surendra sharma Son of Mahindra sharma
Aged about 45yr resident at Road No. 05
Jain colony Tikari

Donor Sd- Donee Sd-

[MITHLESH KUMAR] [SONI SHARMA]

53 | P a g e
 PROMISSORY NOTE

On demand I Bablu Kumar Sharma, Son of Shri Satyendra sharma, Resident of Nandan
bgha Road No.02 Tikari. Jointly and severally promose to pay to Rahul Kumar son of
Mithlesh sharma, Resident of Gautam Buddha colony Road No. 02 Delaha or order the sum
of Indian Rupees 5 Lakh only with interest at the rate of 12% per annum until repayment for
value received.

Date………. Revenue

Place- Gaya Stamp Signature(s)

RECEIPT

Recived from Rahul kumar son of Mithlesh sharma, Resident of Gautam Buddha colony
Road No. 02 Delaha the sum of Rs 5 lakh as loan under note dated 20th October of 2018
executed by me.

Witness:

1. Akashya kumar Son of Omprakash sharma

Aged about 37yr resident at road No. 11
Karkhura , Delha
2. Manoj kumar Son of Viashvanath sharma
Aged about 45yr resident at Road No. 03
Andar kila, Tikari

Revenue Stamp Signature

54 | P a g e
 Appointment of one Attorney in Place of Another
KNOWN ALL MEN, etc.
WHEREAS by a power of attorney dated 20th October2018, Bablu Sharma, son of Shri
Satyendra Sharma, residence of Road No. 02 Nandan Bigha Tikari appointed Aditya Sharma
Son of Sanjya Sharma, Residence of Road No. 01 Vivekanand colony Tikari as my attorney
and gave him certain powers and authorities specified therein with the restrictions and
limitations therein mentioned.

AND WHEREAS I am now desirous of appointing Sunil Singh, etc., as my attorney in

place of the said Aditya Sharma, etc.

NOW I hereby revoke all and singular the powers and authorities given by me to said Aditya
Sharma, etc., by virtue of the power of attorney dated 20th October of 2018

AND further I hereby appoint the said Sunil Singh as my attorney in my name and on my
behalf to do all acts and exercise all the powers and authorities mentioned in the aforesaid
power of attorney dated 20th October of 2018 with such restrictions and limitations as are
mentioned therein, in as effectual a manner as if the name of the said Sunil Singh had been
inserted in the said power of attorney in place of the said Aditya Sharma.

AND I hereby agree that all acts, deeds and things lawfully done by the said Sunil Singh for
me under powers hereby given to him shall be construed as acts, deeds and things done by me
and I undertake to ratify and confirm all and whatsoever the said Sunil Singh shall lawfully do
or cause to be done for me by virtue of the powers given by this deed.

IN WITNESS, whereof I have signed this power of Attorney 20 October of 2018

1. Vivek kumar Son of Dharmendra sharma

Aged about 37yr resident at road No. 11
Nandan bigha Tikari Sd-
2. Surendra sharma Son of Mahindra sharma Executant
Aged about 45yr resident at Road No. 05
Jain colony Tikari

55 | P a g e
 Simple Will giving All Property to One Person
I, Bablu Kumar Sharma, son of Shri, Satyendra Sharma, residence of Road No. 02 Nandan
Bigha , Tikari hereby revoke all former wills and codicils made by me and by this my last will
bequeath and devise all my movable and immovable property whatsoever to Prafull Sharma,
son of Kedarnath Sharma Recidence of Road No. 02 Gutam Buddha Colony, Gaya absolutely
and appoint (him) sole executor of this my will.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have signed this will hereunder on 20 Sep of 2018.

Signed by the above-named testator in our presence at the same time and each of us has in the
presence of the testator signed our name hereunder as an attesting witness:

1. Santosh Kumar Dubey

S/o Late Barj Bilash Dubey
H.No. - GA Station Road, Gaya Testator Sd-
2. Sri Ram Bilash Kumar [BABLU KR SHARMA]
S/o Sri Basant Kumar
Mojheelganj P.O. - Nai Godam
P.S. - Kotwali, Gaya

56 | P a g e
 Mortgage by Deposit of Title Deeds

(a) Promissory Note – On Demand I Sanjay Kumar Son of Sri Shiv Shankar Resident of
Neem Gali 36, Nadraganj (Rampur) Gaya. Do herby Promises to pay Sri Mantu Kumar
S/o Late Balmukund Resident of Dhami Tola, Dr. Wazir Ali, Road, Soda Water Lane,
Gaya. or to his order the sum of Rs 125000 (Rupee one lakh twenty thousand only )
together with interest of 18% p.a for cash in favour of Sanjay Kumar or (according to
circumstances in each case).
Plus

(b) A Letter of deposit anterior or posterior to date of promissory note evidencing deposit
of title deed (speciment form of a letter of deposit after execution of promissory note)

From TO
Sri Vinay Kumar Gupta Sri Vinod Kumar
S/o Sri Kanti Singh House No. 75, S/o Sri Kapil Deo
Tekari Road, Gaya Dr. Anugrah Narayan Rd. Gaya

Dear Sir,
Please find herein a list of document of title of my property (description more fully
described in the schedule hereto) already deposited with you ti secure my borrowing from
you under the promissory note for Rs 125000 (Rupee one lakh twenty five thousand only)
executed on 7th August of 2018 (Date of pronote)

57 | P a g e